Full text of "Louis F. Burns A History Of The Osage People ( 2004)"

See other formats

louis f. burns A HISTORY of

"A particularly valuable work...
well organized and easy to read
especially convenient to use as a
reference book."

Carol Diaz-Granodo^ ocauthar af

7?ie Petr&gtypta and Piatographs ofMifsouri

A History of the Osage People

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Any posting, copying, or distributing of this work beyond fair use as defined under U.S. Copyright law is illegal and
injures the author and publisher. For permission to reuse this work, contact the University of Alabama Press.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

A HISTORY OF
THE OSAGE PEOPLE

Louis F. Burns

THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA PRESS

Tuscaloosa and London

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Manufactured in the United States of America
Originally published by the author in 1989
Typeface: Bembo

The paper on which this book is printed meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Science-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library
Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Burns, Louis F.

A history of the Osage people / Louis F. Burns.— [New ed.]
p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 0-8173-1319-2 (cloth : alk. paper) — ISBN 0-8173-5018-7 (pbk. : alk. paper)

1. Osage Indians—History. I. Title.

E99.O7.B85 2004
978.004^752—dc2i

2003007997

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data available

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

To my wife, Ruth, who is
my greatest fan, my severest critic,
and Wa ta Nontsa.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Contents

Illustrations ix
Preface to the New Edition xi
Preface to the First Edition xiii

PART ONE: THE ASCENT OF THE OSAGE PEOPLE, 1200-1803

1. Osage Origins 3

2. The Osage Empire 23

3. Osage Relationships with Euro-Americans, 1675-1803 87

PART TWO: ERODING THE OSAGE CIVILIZATION, 1803-1850

4. Coming of the Americans 139

5. Treaties and Land Cessions 147

6. The Indian State and Removal 172

7. The Effects of Removal 186

8. Osage Culture and United States’ Policy 198

9. The Search for Comprehension 218

PART THREE: FACING THE FOUR HORSEMEN, 1850-1865

10. Pestilence Strikes the People 233

11. The White Man’s War Visits the Osages 246

PART FOUR: THE EURO-AMERICAN AFFLICTION, 1865-1875

12. The Outcasts 271

13. Osage Land Cession of 1865 281

14. The End of Indian Treaty-Making 292

15. The Drum Creek Treaty 300

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

viii / Contents

16. The Osage Removal 314

17. The Final Move 335

PART FIVE: THE ROAD TO ACCOMMODATION, 1875-1906

18. Farewell to the Past 357

19. Bluestem and Cattle 368

20. Constitutional Government and Allotment 390

PART SIX: STANDING IN TWO WORLDS, 1906-1989

21. Black Gold 417

22. Indian Influences and the Modern Indian 445

23. Epilogue 486
Notes 497
Bibliography 529
Index 541

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Illustrations

Fig. i. Osage Tribal Organization 5
Fig. 2. Woodland-Osage Comparative Designs 8
Fig. 3. Two Ho E Ka Snares 13

Fig. 4. The Relative Location of the Osage Empire in the United States 26
Fig. 5. Osage Expansion, 1500-1800 31

Fig. 6. The Osage Domain and Routes to the Far West 36
Fig. 7. Osage Government: Gentile Government 39
Fig. 8. Osage Government: Three Groups of Bands 42
Fig. 9. Osage Villages and Camps in Missouri 46
Fig. 10. Osage Villages and Camps in Kansas 57
Fig. 11. Osage Villages and Camps in Oklahoma 65
Fig. 12. Osage Trails in Missouri 73
Fig. 13. Osage Trails in Kansas 76
Fig. 14. Osage Trails in Oklahoma 78
Fig. 15. Cultural Contrasts 88
Fig. 16. French and British-American Forts, 1730-1757 100

Fig. 17. Missouri River Trade, 1775-1776 105

Fig. 18. Assignment of Traders, 1794-1795 108

Fig. 19. Location of Indian Nations, 1803 112

Fig. 20. Population of Louisiana, 1771 120

Fig. 21. Cherokee Strip and Outlet 162

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

x / Illustrations
Fig. 22. Cessions of 1808 167

Fig. 23. Cession of 1818 169

Fig. 24. Cession of 1825 170

Fig. 25. Osage Age Groups in 1878 178

Fig. 26. Emigrant Indian Groups of the Northeast and Old Northwest and
Their Respective Populations, 1829 184

Fig. 27. Emigrant Nations on Former Osage Domain in Missouri 187
Fig. 28. Emigrant Nations on Former Osage Domain in Kansas 188
Fig. 29. Emigrant Nations on Former Osage Domain in Oklahoma 190
Fig. 30. Osage-Cherokee Problems 192
Fig. 31. Kiowa Calendar 216
Fig. 32. Harmony School, 1824-1825 221

Fig. 33. Osage Missions 222
Fig. 34. Known Osage Epidemics 239
Fig. 35. Estimates of Osage Population 243
Fig. 36. Kansas Territory 249
Fig. 37. Kansas in 1862 252

Fig. 38. Kansas Population Growth 266
Fig. 39. Leases of 1893 375

Fig. 40. Leases of 1898 376

Fig. 41. Leases of 1900 377

Fig. 42. Leases of 1901 378

Fig. 43. Leases of 1904 380

Fig. 44. Leases of 1905 382

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Preface to the New Edition

Several improvements have been made in this Osage history. Most of Part
One has been almost entirely omitted in order to enable the reader to start
right off with the Osages. The appendices have also been deleted. Since the
botany section, added originally as a point of interest, was general and not
Osage specific, it was not needed here. The biographical section has been
reluctantly left out to conserve space.

A number of corrections were necessary. An incredible amount of ar¬
chaeological developments have occurred in the past decade, and the same is
true of Indian literature. This new information has been added.

Most of the additions are clarifications. Transmitting a thought from one
person to another can be tricky. Rereading something years after it was
written often allows one to see the need for clarification. A significant ad¬
dition is a redesigned population (1878) graph (Fig. 25) that allows the
reader to view the entire graph on one page. The use of story in lieu of
myth in this account must be justified. There are, of course, distinctions
among myth, legend, and folk tales. However, that myth is sometimes taken
as a fable is a deep concern. Myths should always be taken as a part of sin¬
cere religious devotion.

In the haste to get the history into print, its original preface omitted an
important recognition, that is, not giving acknowledgment to a dear, sweet
man, Dr. Abraham P. Nasatir, who gave us a whole day of his valuable time.
If the Spanish period in the Osage history has special merit, it is because of
the late Dr. Nasatir. The first preface acknowledges my wife Ruth as my
helper for forty-four years. Now, in 2002 ,1 must thank her for fifty-seven
years.

As a final note, I would like to stress again the lessons of the Osage ex¬
perience as exposed in the history. The first lesson is that of being adaptive
to change—this is the only constant. The second is to love the earth, for it
is all we have.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

xii / Preface to the New Edition

In the Osage Ne ke A Tun ka (Great Words of the Ancient People), there
is a thought we have paraphrased in American-style English:

To touch the earth is to touch the past, the present, and the future.

We hope this account of the Osage experience, bought at such a terrible
price, will encourage each of us to keep in touch with the earth, for the
earth is truly our past, present, and future.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Preface to the First Edition

When a person becomes rash enough to undertake the writing of history,
it behooves him to explain his views about it. Defining history is no easy
task. It may be a simple chronicle of events or it might be an intricate web
of human intrigue. Whatever history might be, it cannot be the same as
the actual event or experience. Obviously, to write an action or perform
deeds of yore on paper is not possible. Thus, history through necessity must
capture only the essences of the past, and in doing this it becomes interpre¬
tative.

All history, therefore, is interpretative. This places a terrible burden upon
the writer of history. One must try to rise above backgrounds and truth¬
fully and faithfully reflect the past of those who are no longer alive to de¬
fend themselves. This is especially difficult because it is easier to condemn
than it is to praise.

If one condemns, it should be for a constructive reason. Praise is a reward
for something above the ordinary, and it too should be used constructively.
A writer of history must try to exercise restraint and seek moderation in
the presentation. The lure of overstatement and understatement is always
with us. With these thoughts in mind, I would like to express a few of my
goals.

The writing of this history began long ago in the idle hours of my
childhood. It started as a boyhood dream and simmered in the mind of a
young man. Through maturity, it began to solidify and now in my “golden
years” it has become a reality. This history was over three-hundred years in
the making and a lifetime in the writing.

Along the way, decisions about interpretation and presentation were
made. Very early, it was decided that the Osage viewpoint would prevail—it
would hold the center of the stage. If I have erred, I have tried to err on
behalf of the Osages. Some will accuse me of being biased in favor of the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

xiv / Preface to the First Edition

Osages. My answer is, “It is time for some bias in favor of the Osages—there
has been so much bias against them.”

Another priority is to avoid the “Lo! The poor Indian,” practice, which
seeks to point to the great evils committed against Indians. If this were all
it did, it would not be so repulsive, but it also points the accusing finger at
all who have descended from those people who treated Indians so shabbily.
It is an outright bid for sympathy and relieves one of the need to compre¬
hend. The Osages do not need or want sympathy, but they desperately need
understanding.

It would be misleading to allow the reader to think this history is the
work of a single person. A glance at the bibliography will show a legion of
contributors. I have carefully tried to credit these contributions in the foot¬
notes. I cannot possibly list all those who assisted in the writing of this
history, but I would like to mention a few. Maude Cheshewalla often dis¬
cussed the Osage People with me. Her store of Osage life and culture was
remarkable. She will be mournfully missed in the days ahead. Mr. Joe
Revelette placed us heavily in debt for the collection of papers he accumu¬
lated during his terms as a council member. Chief Sylvester Tinker has over
the years discussed many Osage matters and has filled in many blanks. No
one can imagine how much my wife of forty-four years has helped. Specifi¬
cally, the index is all Ruth’s work but her help went far beyond this.

If some of the things about the organization and presentation of this
history seem strange, this is not accidental. I deliberately tried to establish a
different pattern for Indian histories. However, to avoid any misunderstand¬
ings, I would like to explain what I was trying to do.

The history opens with a prologue and ends with an epilogue. In every
history there are lessons to be learned. The prologue is meant to alert the
reader to the central theme running through the chronicle of events, that is,
survival in its array of costumes. The epilogue returns to this theme in order
to see how the Osages fared as a result of the Ordeal and what we as a
country should learn from their experience. This is a simple fundamental
question and it has a simple fundamental answer.

The drama that unfolds in Osage history is exciting. Before our eyes we
see a proud but disciplined people rise to become the most potent force in
mid-America. Equally vivid is the soul-rendering erosion of all they had.
Their lands, their culture, their pride, their discipline, and their population
were gone. Only shreds and tatters remained. Yet they did not despair.
Money came in undreamed torrents, but it could not buy what was gone.
Facing reality, these remnants turned to the present. Again, rising from the
ashes of their past the Osages are seeking through excellence to become
“the people.”

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

A History of the Osage People

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART ONE

The Ascent of the Osage
People, 1200-1803

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins

THE PREHISTORIC OSAGES
Introduction

While there is considerable amount of disagreement about Osage origins, it
is clear the Osage people originated east of the Mississippi. According to
Osage traditions, as interpreted by J. Owen Dorsey, the Osage (Dhegiha
Sioux) homeland was the Chesapeake Piedmont. 1 Recent archaeological
findings seem to indicate that both the Dhegiha Sioux and Chewere Sioux
were the Indian-Knoll and shell mound culture of Kentucky and Tennessee.
While this would not necessarily negate the Chesapeake concept, it would
tend to trace their westward migration. The Indian-Knoll theory makes a
definite connection with the Folsom culture. 2

Shell Mound Culture

Sizable numbers of so-called shell mounds can be found along the Ohio
River and lower reaches of the Tennessee River. We say “so-called” because
shells actually make up a small percentage of the mounds. The surviving
artifacts show that the phase was primarily a hunting culture that used mus¬
sels and gathering to supplement their diet.

Quapaw legends clearly link the Quapaw and other Dhegiha Sioux
(Osage, Quapaw, Ponca, Omaha, and Kansas) with the Indian-Knoll. This, in
turn, almost certainly indicates a descent from the Folsom and Clovis cul¬
tures because the lower levels of the mounds and the nearby rock shelters
and caves are proven to be from the Folsom culture. Because the occupation
seemingly was continuous from around 8000 b.c. to a.d. 1300, some justifi¬
cation for a claim for this descent exists. 2

A combination of archaeology and the body of Chewere/Dhegiha sto¬
ries and legends leave little doubt that both the Dhegiha and their near kins-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

4 / Osage Origins

men the Chewere Sioux (Missouria, Otoe, Iowa, and Winnebago) remained
primarily Archaic throughout most of the Woodland period. That is, while
they almost certainly adopted many Adena, Hopewell, and Mississippian
traits, the Archaic culture remained the base culture of both the Dhegiha
and Chewere. Some Dhegiha and Chewere undoubtedly became a part of
the late Mississippian Oneota people. Certainly, de Soto’s expedition clearly
shows that in the mid-1500s the Quapaw exhibited Mississippian Southern
culture.

It seems probable that the Hopewell phase encompassed several different
Indian groups instead of being composed of only one people. Doubts cer¬
tainly exist when the manner of Hopewell expansion is considered. The
original Hopewell people differed from the western extension or Illinois
Hopewellians. The core Hopewell estate group did not expand through con¬
quest and the forced adoption of conquered groups but instead accepted
other groups who wished to join them and absorbed them into their culture
without coercion. However, the Illinois Hopewellians evidently expanded
through conquest and forced adoption. 4 The Osages clearly followed the
practice of the Hopewell estate core group in this particular matter.

Figure 1 shows the five subdivision mergers of the Osage people, based
on their stories, legends, and ceremonies. These sources show that the new
groups were accepted in every case without coercion. As a matter of known
practice, each new group was given the position of greatest honor, and rites
of the new group were given precedence over the rites of the mother group.
Sometimes a new line of worship was instituted. Each of these new amal¬
gamations entailed a move to new country. This Osage expression means a
change to an untried organization, which may or may not involve an actual
physical move into a new land area. Another aspect of this expression in¬
volves a concept alien to the European mind. This concept involves the prac¬
tice of a powerful majority submitting themselves to the unknown ways of
a weaker minority so the minority will feel comfortable with the merger. 5
In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli advises his Prince to allow conquered
people to live under their usual laws and habits as much as possible. The
Osages went much farther than this, and changed their own laws and habits
to accommodate the new people.

The Mississippian Phase

The Mississippian phase of the Late Woodland culture probably arose from
remnants of the Hopewell phase. Mississippian mounds built on the flood
plains along the middle Mississippi River and lower ends of the Illinois,
Ohio, and Tennessee Rivers indicate these areas as places of origin for this

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 5

OSAGE TRIBAL ORGANIZATION 1

/ ^

/i*

f 6

//’

T»i lhu

/« /

lioJated Earth Piopl. ffy

J /

W. aha a he

Oranil War Party

7~^ n —

—^ Hun ka

Smalt War Party

] Tii shu Peacemaker *”*

t Pon ca Peacemaker

- --t — r

No. 1 indicates the place occupied by the Isolated Earth people when they were
found by the We she the.

No. 2 indicates the “new country" to which the Wa iha she and isolated Earth
people moved Hera they were joined by the Hun ka andTsi shu. Thace four croups
created lha Grand War Parry*

No. 3. indicates the place to which all the people moved The dies for the Small War

Party ware formed here.

Not. 4 and S Indicate another **move to naw country" where the civil government
was formed. The two Peacemaker clans were formed and a chief was taken Trom
each of the two clans.

Fig. i. Chart showing mergers and organization of Osage government. This chart was
drawn by Red Bird to illustrate the story of creating the Osage tribal government
(from 36th Annual Report, BAE, Smithsonian).

culture. Artifacts from these areas suggest influences from Mexico at about

A.D. 900. 6

After a.d. 1200 the Mississippian influence spread to the lower Mississippi
and the Southeast. 7 Of special interest to this history is the expansion along
the Arkansas River. The mounds at Spiro, Oklahoma, lay in the historic
Osage territory, including the mounds on the north side and near the mouth
of the Arkansas. What is called the Long-Nosed God cult of the Southeast¬
ern Mississippian is of interest because of its Caddo connection. The Caddo
also occupied the area of the Spiro Mounds in historic times, and evidence
indicates that the Long-Nosed cult came to the Southeastern Mississippian
through the Caddo.

Osage stories tell of the search for the Isolated Earth People. Descriptions
of their village and customs fit the Caddo better than any other known
culture. Yet the stories clearly say the Isolated Earth People spoke the same
language. While the stories indicate no particular time span, they do rnain-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

6 / Osage Origins

tain a sequence of events. Under this sequence, the Isolated Earth People
entered the Osage Tribal Circle between the Earth and Sky people. That is,
they joined the Wa sha she (Water People) and Hun ka (Earth People) before
the Tsi slut (Sky People). 8 We have some indications that the Wa sha she and
Hun ka were Ohio Hopewellian. There is also a story of a Chewere (Iowa,
Missouria, Otoe) association. 9 The Osage name for the Iowa is Pa Ho tse or
Snow Head. The story relates that the Iowa left the others (Dhegiha and
Chewere) during a snow storm. Since the Chewere are known to have
moved west from the Great Lakes, this would seem to indicate the Wa sha
she and Hun ka also followed this route from the upper Ohio. Thus, the
Isolated Earth People seem to be from the northern Caddo instead of south¬
ern Caddo, if they were not Dakota Sioux. Stray bands of Caddoean Paw¬
nee were known to have entered North Central Illinois.

Like other Woodland cultures, the Mississippian phase was characterized
by mounds. These mounds were different from the Hopewellian mounds in
two respects. They were larger and they were pyramidal rather than conical.
Monks Mound at Cahokia, Illinois, was started in a.d. 900 and took two-
hundred-fifty years to build. Its base covers eighteen acres, and it rises one
hundred feet above its base. 10 The tops of the pyramidal mounds were flat,
and wooden houses for temples or housing of leaders were built on the flat
area. Often, these mounds were erected on the four sides of a central square
in major ceremonial centers. Ceremonial centers featured satellite villages
and maintenance of eternal fires, both of which are also features found in
the Mayan culture. 11 While food production was very like the Hopewell
phase, the Mississippian people practiced a more intensive corn culture with
improved varieties of corn. 12

Mississippian pottery shows improved techniques over the Hopewellian
pottery, and the resemblance to Mexican ceramics is more pronounced.
New artistic capabilities are also evident in engravings and painting. More
than anything else, the socio-religious-political system of the Mississippian
shows a revolution in Hopewellian ways. This tightly organized system was
structured around new religious beliefs and ceremonies 13 resembling those
of the Mayan. It is possible that a Mexican group of Indians may have es¬
tablished a colony among the late-Hopewellians and formed the nucleus of
the Mississippian phase. However, they may have come to the Mississippian
peoples indirectly through the Caddo people.

The Mississippian phase reached a climax in the 1500s, after which their
ceremonial centers were neglected and the population dispersed. Although
religious and political institutions were altered, they became weaker in spite
of these efforts. We cannot be certain what caused the fall of the culture.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 7

However, such a sudden large population loss often suggests epidemics, pos¬
sibly from diseases transmitted by Europeans. 14 Tatters of the phase re¬
mained to be recorded by de Soto and early French explorers. 15 Of spe¬
cial interest to Osage history is a possible invasion from the northeast. If
such an invasion did occur, it would have driven many Mississippian groups
into Iowa. There the fragmented groups could have amalgamated into the
Oneota aspect. 16 Archaeological studies by Carl H. Chapman, Brewton
Berry, and John Mack seem to place the Dhegiha in the Upper Mississippian
phase. They do not separate the Big and Little Osages, but their report does
reflect differences between the two Osage groups. These historians also felt
the Osages could have belonged to the Oneota aspect as well as the Chewere.
The pottery at the Little Osage site in the Bend of the Missouri most
closely resembled the Orr focus of the Oneota aspect, but differed in some
fine details. 17 This viewpoint is also reflected by other authorities. 18

Archaeologists rely on the hard evidence of artifacts. Anthropologists,
ethnologists, and sociologists add theories that are based on the knowledge
of humans. While stories and legends are indeed soft evidence, they do
sometimes provide a degree of guidance in the search for truth. Two factors
from the stories, legends, and ceremonies of the Osage strongly suggest a
connection with both the Hopewell and Mississippian phases of the Wood¬
land culture.

The comparison of Woodland designs with Osage designs are shown in
Figure 2. 19 A question arises about the circle with a black dot in the center.
In the desert culture, a circle with a dark dot in the center indicates a camp¬
site. However, this particular design was from the Woodland culture of Mis¬
souri and could have had at least two other meanings. It could mean O ke
sa or Midheaven, where the people acquired souls; O ke sa was midway
between the second and third Upper Worlds. O ke sa also symbolized the
origin of all human life and the place where the soul must return when the
physical body dies. A second possible meaning requires some explanation.
The Osages had no design to represent the concept of the Isolated Earth,
although the idea is included in their ceremonies. This concept argues that
the earth is a celestial body apart from the other heavenly bodies. (This is
much like the old Ptolemaic theory.) As a matter of interest, all Osages
claim origins in the four upper worlds, except the Isolated Earth People
who claim origins on earth. Since the Dakota Sioux also claim origins on
the earth, this could indicate the Isolated Earth people were from either the
Dakota or some other Siouan group whose views differed from the views
of the Dhegiha.

The Four Winds or Breath of Life symbol is well known, since it is not

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

8 / Osage Origins

Fig. 2. The comparative designs have the same basic meanings.

exclusive to the Osage. On the other hand, the Striking the Earth symbol
is distinctively Osage. It expresses the unity of sky and earth, which makes
life on earth possible. The wavy lines of the Woodland design superimposed
on the sun has the same meaning. In the Osage design, the sun is represented
by a small round shape in the center, and the suns path is shown as straight
bars. Benefits of the sun are shown as wavy lines. 2 ”

A second Woodland cultural influence on the Osage is a Mayan morning
prayer. The Osages were noted for their morning devotions at sunrise. To
Euro-American ears, this sounded like a funeral with wailing and weeping.
Yet, prayers were recited to greet the sun and its life-giving rays. It was these
prayers that stirred memories of departed loved ones and evoked the wails

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 9

and tears. The Osage sun prayers at dawn express much the same thoughts
as the Mayan dawn prayer. 21 “Look at us, hear us! . . . Heart of heaven,
Heart of Earth! Give us our descendants, our succession, as long as the sun
shall move. . . . Let it dawn, let the day come! . . . May the people have
peace . . . may they be happy . . . give us good life . . . grandmother of the
sun, grandmother of the light, let there be dawn ... let the light come.” 22

Certainly, the Osage obsession with a long life, both as individuals and
through descendants, is well known. For example, the red cedar is symbolic
of individual old age and the red oak symbolizes a long life through many
descendants. Pe se or acorns of the red oak are likened to a profusion of
descendants. White and pale blue are symbolic of the clear day which, in
turn, refers to a long peaceful life. Since these concepts are associated with
the Tsi shu, the fourth group to join the Osage, they almost certainly came
from the Mississippian phase.

The Prehistoric Age

In many respects the Prehistoric Age actually reaches back to the Adena
phase of the Golden Age. That is, both the Golden Age and the Prehistoric
Age begin at the close of the Archaic Age. This last Paleohistoric period of
the North American Indian represents a parallel line of development to the
Woodland and Desert cultures. Whereas the Golden Age cultures turned
more and more away from the hunt and toward agriculture, the Prehistoric
Age tended to retain many ways identified with the Archaic Age. At first, the
Prehistoric trend involved a few isolated bands of hunters. Possibly, their
ranks were increased by descendants of Ice Age hunters who followed the
game northward as the glaciers retreated. These descendants could have been
invaders of the Woodland and Desert cultures. In any event, all through the
Golden Age there were small independent groups who developed their own
languages and were basically hunters.

Aside from these small groups—who apparently never attached them¬
selves to the major cultures—were other groups. Any society has dissident
factions who, for reasons of their own, sever their connections with the so¬
ciety and strike out on their own. Such rebel groups tend to increase as a
culture falters and loses its vitality. Other groups may have found the free
life of seminomadic hunting more attractive than sedentary village life.
These factors would create many diverse groups, such as existed when Eu¬
ropeans first met the North American Indian.

The Osages were always drawn to the hunt by the attractions it offered.
They were also cognizant of the advantages offered by the agricultural
Woodland cultures. They could never abandon the free life of the hunt for
the regimentation of agricultural life, yet they could accept some advantages

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

10 / Osage Origins

offered by both. The Osages may have acted as suppliers of raw material to
the main Woodland centers. They apparently always, right up to historic
times, lived on the fringes of the Woodland cultures. Their easy adaptation
and utilization of trade with Europeans suggests the possibility of trade ex¬
perience.

With the exception of three of the six Little Osage bands, the Osages
have traditionally sought out hill country that adjoined a major river. This
runs counter to the Woodland practices, where the flood plains were the
preferred terrain. Most of the people in the three Little Osage bands that
differed in terrain preferences were Those Who Were Last to Come. That is,
it is all but certain that they were from the Arkansas River Mississippians.
Nearly all these Little Osages were also Heart Stays People. 23

Several accounts stress a close association of the Osages with the Missis¬
sippi Illinois Indians. The earliest of these accounts was written in 1682 by
Father Zenobius Membre, who was with the La Salle Expedition: “There
had been several engagements with equal loss on both sides, and that, at last,
of the seventeen Illinois villages, the greater part had retired beyond the
river Colbert [Mississippi River] among the Ozages, 200 leagues from their
country, where a part of the Iroquois had pursued them.” 24

The known Osage tendency to fight any invasion of their territory
seems to have been replaced in this case by a rare amity toward the Illinois.
It is the only such case recorded where the Osages sheltered a large group
of distressed alien Indians. They did allow the Wichitas to hunt in their
territory during the Civil War, but they did not shelter them from other
Indians.

A second account was written in 1721 by Sieur Deliette, a nephew of
Henri de Tonti. 25 It is well to mention that this description of a calumet
included Missourias and Osages, which suggests that the Osages were Little
Osages. Deliette described the singing of the calumet by the Osages in great
detail. This is the only recorded account of Osages singing a calumet among
any other Indian people. The rarity of Osages sheltering the Illinois and the
singing of a calumet among them show a strong association between these
two peoples.

A third account, written by Thomas Nuttall in 1819, also notes this
strong relationship. Nuttall was correct in linking the Quapaw and the
Osage together by language: “The friendship which they [Illinois] culti¬
vated, about a century ago, with the Osages, and the Arkansas [Quapaw],
who are the same people, and some incidental resemblances between them,
lead us to believe them commonly related by language and descent.” 26 Nut¬
tall was also correct in noting their close relationship to each other. In ad¬
dition, a close relationship existed between the Osage and the Illinois.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 11

A discrepancy of twenty-seven years exists between Nuttall’s estimate
of one hundred years of amity and Membres account in 1682. However,
Osage stories and legends indicate Those Who Were Last to Come joined
with the Osages sometime between 1600 and 1682. Another part of Nut-
tail’s account indicates the Illinois were also on amicable terms with the
Quapaw.

In describing de Soto’s trans-Mississippi route, Houck mentions a battle
between the Casquins (Kaskaskias) and the Capahas (Quapaws). 27 Appar¬
ently, this battle took place slightly north of New Madrid, Missouri. The
battle was with the Cahokia and Kaskaskia bands of the Illinois that the
Osages and Quapaws were on friendly terms with at a later date. Although
other Illinois such as the Peoria and Weas lived near the Osages in the 1850s,
no special animosities or amity appear in the records. 2h The Quapaw and
Illinois evidently reconciled their differences between 1539 (de Soto’s Ex¬
pedition) and 1719 (if we use Nuttall’s estimate; 1682, if we use Membres
account). The Membre account is more likely to be accurate since it was
closer to the event in time.

One other matter touched upon by Houck is interesting. Houck places
de Soto on the upper White River at a Caya (Kansas) village. 29 Identifica¬
tion of these Indians is credited to Schoolcraft. While we have the highest
regard for both Houck and Schoolcraft, we cannot agree to this identifica¬
tion. Without a doubt Caya does refer to Kon za or Kansas, but it would
seem to apply to the Osage or Quapaw Kon za clan instead of to the Kansas
or Kaw tribe. Many Little Osages from this original Hun ka clan broke off
from the Little Osages around a.d. 1500 and moved up the Missouri to form
the Kansas tribe. This new tribe settled above the mouth of the Kansas
River and obviously did not hunt or dwell on the Arkansas. Most of the
remaining Kon za clan were with the Pomme de Terre River Big Osages,
who established numerous villages between the headwaters of the Pomme
Terre and White Rivers in Missouri. We find it difficult to associate the Kaw
tribe with the upper White River, which was deep within Osage home
territory and not adjacent to or near Kansas tribal areas. This is the only
reference available that reported the Kaw being so far south.

It had to be the Big Osages or Quapaw of the Kon za clan—who re¬
mained with the Osages and had from the first formed around the Grand
Hun ka Chief—that was mentioned in the de Soto account. They later sup¬
ported the leadership of young Claremore II and his uncle Tracks Far Away
(Big Foot) who was the Grand Hun ka Chief by the late-1700s. Only
the Spanish records mention these Grand Hun ka Chiefs and the Pomme
de Terre bands. 3 " The Spanish records, however, omit the Black Dog Band
which was one of the Pomme de Terre bands.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

12 / Osage Origins

OSAGE STORIES AND LEGENDS RELATING
TO THEIR ORIGINS

Introduction

Before the discussion of the Osage stories, some explanations are necessary.
First and foremost, paraphrases and not actual interpretations will be given.
Most of these stories are recorded in Osage, in literal translation, and in free
translation by the Bureau of American Ethnology. Secondly, each of the
twenty-four clans had different versions of these stories. Although they
agree in essence, they vary in some details. Another related problem arises
because some parts of these stories were the exclusive property of a particu¬
lar clan. Sometimes, these special parts could not be recorded because their
owners would not sell them and, thus, they have been lost. A third item is a
caution. These stories and comments must not be taken as proof of any¬
thing. They are presented as possible clues in Osage prehistory.

A final observation in regard to Osage oral stories must be made: The
circumstances under which these stories were related and recorded is of vi¬
tal importance to their accuracy. For example, if a story was given without
charge at any time, especially in the dead of winter, it should be suspected
of being of questionable authenticity. Osage stories were not given free of
charge by the Little Old Men, who were the true keepers of Osage stories
and legends. Something had to be given in return for the story. In January
and February, the Guardians of Ones Word were inactive. Thus, an Osage
could and often would tell some big whoppers. However, when the Guardi¬
ans were active, an Osage would be as truthful as his ability, knowledge, and
courtesy allowed.

The innate courtesy of the Osage sometimes created unreliable informa¬
tion. If a slight acquaintance seemed eager for some bit of information, an
Osage would extend himself to tell the person what he wanted to hear. It
was considered a duty to do this rather than to disappoint an acquaintance.
Stories recorded by the Bureau of Ethnology were paid for and were related
by the Little Old Men to trusted friends. Any deviations from the centuries-
old wording—which sometimes happened because of memories that had
faded from lack of use—were either noted and paraphrased by the Little
Old Men or omitted rather than give a false story.

Genesis

According to the Panther (Puma) clan version of the Osage genesis story,
the beings who became Osage originated in the fourth or lowest upper
world. They had no bodies, no souls, nor communication or intellect. As they
ascended through the third upper world into the second upper world, they

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 13

TWO HO E KA (SNARES)

Fig. 3. a. The elk’s forehead, which represents the horizons of the earth and the four
winds, b. A stylized black widow spider whose web was also a snare for all life.

acquired souls. This point, midway in the upper worlds, is called O fee sa
(Midway). In the second upper world, they acquired intellect, and in the first
upper world they acquired communication.

Although the people now had souls, mind, and communication, they still
felt incomplete because they had no bodies. Since bodies could not exist in
the upper worlds, they realized they would have to descend to the earth.
After asking the various manifestations of Wall kon ta for help, the people
finally asked Hun ka All Im tun (Hun ka, Having Wings) to lead them below
where they could have bodies. Assuming the form of eagles, the people
soared downward and alit in seven trees. 31 All the earth below the branches
was covered with still water. After some time, O pon Tun ka (Big Elk) came
to their aid. Four times he threw himself upon the still waters until the soil
of the earth appeared. Big Elk then called for the four winds, the breath of
Wa kon ta, to come dry the land. He called first the wind of the rising sun.
Then he called loudly over the lands of the earth for the cedar wind (north
wind). He called for the wind from sundown and the warm winds of the
south. Once the winds were gathered, the Elk endowed them with the
breath of life and commanded them to blow over the earth.

Again, the huge elk threw himself upon the ground. He left hairs on
the ground which became grasses and useful plants. Food animals would
feed on the grasses, and other plants furnished the people with food wher¬
ever they wandered. Now the elk gave the people his last gift: “Take my
forehead, for I have made a snare for all life; none can escape from it.” This
refers to the dark outline on the elk’s forehead, which is shown in Fig¬
ure 3(a).

The Ancient Osages considered the earth to be a snare or trap which held
all physical life. Only by death, which freed the soul from the physical body

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

14 / Osage Origins

and allowed it to escape, could a creature of earth escape the snare. The
Milky Way was likened to the spirit path which led the way back to O ke
sa. For three days the soul lingered here on earth, then it started the long
journey back to O ke sa where it had come from. 32

Wa kon ta brought the sky and earth together so that physical life such as
plants and animals could exist on earth. Rains and the warm sun’s rays came
from the sky and the earth nourished and sheltered all the physical bodies.
Therefore, all physical life was confined to the earth, for only there could it
find such things in the proper combination.

We do not attach any symbolism to the four upper worlds. In the version
just given, the trees stood in still waters, but in the Black Bear version they
stood amidst huge boulders. This indicates a mixed woodland and grassland.
The elk was not confused with the moose, who was a swamp animal. The
elk has the Ho e ka etched in black on his forehead; the moose does not have
this marking. Thus, a temporary standing of water seems probable. This was
a condition common to the glacial climates. Stress placed on the size of the
elk suggests a prehistoric elk. In ordinary usage the elk was called Wa tso Ta
Cee (Yellow Animal) or O pon (Elk). The addition of Tun ka (big, huge,
great) to O pon signifies an extraordinary elk. 33

Forming the Confederation

Figure i shows the merging of five subdivisions to make up the Osage
people. The Hun ka (Earth People) joined the Wa sha she (Water People)
who were the original Osages. We do not have the stories associated with
this event because they have been lost in time. Yet, we know from the word¬
ing of the Wa ho pe songs that this was true. These two people, the Wa sha
she and Hun ka, formed the ancient fourteen fireplace organization. They
had seven Wa sha she and seven Hun ka fireplaces. A moiety of War ( Hun ka)
and Peace (Wa sha she) existed. Traditionally, the O su ka ha (Those Who
Make Clear the Way) clan of the Wa sha she led the people in their wander¬
ings. It was members of this clan who first met the Isolated Earth People.
One look at the new people s village discouraged the Osages from entering.
Only one member of Those Who Make Clear the Way clan would enter the
village. Human bones lay strewn about mingled with animal bones. Excre¬
ment and accumulated debris were scattered throughout the village. The
stench was almost unbearable. 34

A breakthrough occurred during the visit between the two headmen.
First, they marveled at the fact that they spoke the same language. Then the
Wa sha she mentioned that he was Hun ka (of the earth, in this sense) and
the other leader covered his mouth (surprise) and said he too was Hun ka
(of the earth). After some discussion, it was agreed that they would all

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 15

make a move to new country. That is, they would reorganize and become one
people. An actual move to a new area was part of the agreement along with
the abandonment of the unsanitary practices of the Isolated Earth People.
One other concession was made by the new people. Their leader had men¬
tioned that they used the four winds to destroy all life. Since the Osages did
not believe in destroying life, the Isolated Earth people also agreed to aban¬
don this practice. The two groups then formed a union for mutual defense.

Two Houses of Mysteries were created. One, called the Little House of
Mysteries, was placed in charge of the Isolated Earth People. Ironically, or
maybe wisely, this was the House of Peaceful Ceremonies. For example, the
Isolated Earth clan always conducted the naming ceremonies. The other
house was called the Big House of Mysteries and it was placed in charge of
the Black Bear or Radiant Star clan. All ceremonies of war, which included
the hunt since it too involved taking life, were held in this house. Generally,
throughout the ceremonial songs, the expression, “it has been said,” refers to
the house of peace and the expression, “it has been said in this house,” refers
to the house of war.

As Figure i shows, the Hun ka had joined the Wa sha she and then broken
off again before meeting with the Isolated Earth People. As the same dia¬
gram shows, they rejoined in time for this new organization. Possibly the
Hun ka objected to accepting the Isolated Earth People into the tribal circle.
This could account for giving the house of war to the Hun ka instead of
the Isolated Earth. In the new tribal circle, the Deer and Fish clans of the
Wa sha she were counted as one fireplace in order to make a place for the
Isolated Earth. The Hun ka remained as seven fireplaces on the War side of
the circle. Although the Tsi shu are shown as joining the circle at this time,
we believe they joined after the basic organization was formed but before
the new liturgy evolved.

It seems probable that the Tsi shu refused to join the others at first be¬
cause of the dominant role in the new government given to the Isolated
Earth and the Hun ka. However, the four ceremonial pauses before the ac¬
tual attack of a war party or hunting party testify to the Tsi shu presence in
this new alliance. The War Party in Great Numbers (or Grand War Party)
was a part of this new organization, and it also included the Tsi shu.

The legends tell of a long time of almost continuous warfare and inter¬
nal strife. Confusion reached such a critical point that the Wa sha she led
another move to new country. In this reorganization, the Houses of Mysteries
were left in the same hands, except the Panther (puma) clan joined with its
kindred Black Bear clan as vice-chairman of the house of war. Authority to
initiate war movements was vested in the Black Bear, Hun ka clan; the Wa
sha she division; the Tsi shu division; and the Isolated Earth division. It

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

16 / Osage Origins

should be noted, that the Hun ka were represented by a single clan, but the
other divisions were represented by division. This reorganization severely
curtailed the powers of the Isolated Earth People. This was probably done
to satisfy the Tsi shu. The subordination of the Hun ka division power to
one clan could have served the same purpose. It cannot be determined with
certainty that a power struggle was going on among the divisions. However,
the stories seem to imply that compromises were made to ease hurt feelings.

Without a doubt, this first reorganization brought a much needed period
of order and peace to the Osage. Apparently, it eased internal strife among
the divisions and provided an effective military response. However, the
military organization eventually became increasingly burdened with time-
consuming ceremonies, which tended to hamper its quick response to hos¬
tile intrusions. By 1500, the ceremonies had become so cumbersome that a
reorganization was necessary, yet a full reorganization did not occur until
after 1600. About this same time, a final group merged with the Osages.
These people were called the Tsi ha she (Those Who Were Last to Come).

The story of creating the Hawk Wa ho pe or Hawk Shrine throws light
on the Tsi ha she and the second reorganization. 35 The Old Men, having
determined the hawk was suitable for use in a new war ritual as an emblem
of courage, began to make a Hawk Shrine. As they were working on the last
shrine in the House of Mysteries, they were startled by a sudden clap of
thunder. A Sho ka (messenger) was sent to see what had made such a great
noise. He soon returned and reported Man of Mystery had made the noise. 36
All the Little Old Men agreed that Man of Mystery was a desirable person,
so he was invited to join them and he was promised the finished shrine
would be given to his keeping. With this invitation and promise, Man of
Mystery descended and alit on the ridgepole of the House of Mysteries.

Almost immediately there was another terrifying noise outside the door.
As the messenger threw aside the door flap, there stood a huge enraged buf¬
falo bull. He pawed the earth and bellowed, “I am Buffalo Bull, lift up your
heads.” 37 Terrified, the Ancient Men threw the sacred emblems toward the
angry bull. Seeing this, he immediately became quiet and friendly. As a re¬
sult, the Men of Mystery and Buffalo Bull clans became joint keepers of the
Hawk Wa ho pe . 38

It seems clear that the Tsi ha she had brought the Small War Party and
Little Shrine ideas to the Osages. Equally clear is that the original intent was
to assign control of the Little Shrine to one of the more powerful subdivi¬
sions such as the Tsi shu. This story illustrates the argument that ensued as
a result of that intent. A significant fact is that the Small War Party and
Portable Shrine concepts are typically Algonquian.

Three classes of small war parties were created under this third military

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 17

government. All three could be created outside the House of Mysteries. This
meant they could be formed without the time-consuming ceremonies of
the Grand War Party, which often consumed seven to fourteen days. In ad¬
dition, frequent ceremonies were held while the war party traveled. The
first class of Small War Parties was made up of warriors from only one of
the Grand Divisions. A second type of small party consisted of warriors of
at least two clans from either of the two Grand Divisions. Finally, a Small
War Party could be formed by warriors from a single clan. It was under this
last reorganization of the military branch of government that the Osages
first met the white man. The Black Bear and Panther clans that gave the
Spanish and Americans so much trouble on the Arkansas River were Small
War Parties of the third class.

Along with the military reorganization, the Little Old Men, who had
now become the controlling power of the Osages, also reorganized the gen¬
tile system. The Wa sha she, Hun ka and Isolated Hun ka became subdivisions
of the Hun ka Grand Division. This division represented the lands and wa¬
ters of the earth. A second Grand Division was composed of the Tsi shu and
the Tsi ha she subdivisions, which represented the sky.

Government Organization

Weaknesses in the civil government did not become evident for several
generations. Even when the problems were recognized, more generations
elapsed before solutions were formulated and implemented. To keep the
civil government separated from the military government, two new clans
were created from older clans. These new clans were denoted as gentle or
peacemaker clans. Each of the two Grand Divisions (moieties) had one
peacemaker clan. A hereditary line of Chiefs was established for both the
Sky and Earth Grand Divisions. The Osages were at least two centuries
ahead of the British in one concept: Grand Division Chiefs were like the
later British Prime Minister and the Cabinet members. Often the British
Prime Minister is described as a peer among equals. That is, the two Chiefs
were equal in theory, but the Tsi shu Grand Chief was dominant in prac¬
tice. This was especially true after contact with Euro-Americans, since the
Grand Sky Chief became spokesman for the Little Old Men. The Grand
Earth Division Chief was with the Claremore bands and was considered to
be no more than a band chief by Euro-Americans.

To forestall any seizure of total power by either or both Grand Chiefs,
the Ancient Men carefully outlined the duties and powers of the Chiefs.
The twelve rules for the Chiefs were well understood by the people. We
will only touch on two of these, but mainly they were provisions to allow
the Grand Chiefs to keep the internal peace and to save the lives of captives

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

18 / Osage Origins

(internal sovereignty). In no way were the Grand Chiefs given any war
powers or power to meddle in external affairs (external sovereignty). Ap¬
parently, this was modified slightly after contact with the white man. The
Grand Tsi shu Chief was given the office of spokesman for the Ne ke a Shin
ka (Little Ancient Men) much as the Prime Minister speaks for the British
Cabinet. Evidently, none of the Euro-American peoples were aware of this
until the late-i8oos. By this time, the Ne ke a were fading away as an effec¬
tive force in Osage government.

The eleventh rule for the Grand Chiefs involved the hunt, which in
Osage minds was almost identical to warfare. 39 It was the obligation of
the Grand Chiefs, who shared the responsibilities, to designate the route,
the campsites, and departure times to and from the Grand Buffalo Hunts.
While traveling, the Chiefs served on alternate days. Once they arrived on
the hunting grounds a ceremonially appointed Director of the Hunt took
charge. This chief served only for the term of the one hunt. No permanent
war or hunt chiefs were ever permitted in Osage government; the term of
office was always limited to one specific engagement.

It seems strange that no early observer associated the so-called soldiers to
their proper place in the Osage government. The twelfth rule for Chiefs
spells out the role of one class of soldiers. To aid the Grand Chiefs in the
enforcement of their duties, each Chief was empowered to select five assis¬
tants called Ki he ka Ah ke ta or Chief Protectors. These Ah ke ta had to be
selected from any of ten clans, but the Chief was not required to select his
five Protectors from his own Grand Division. Chief Protectors were always
from the following clans: HUN KA DIVISION: Black Bear or Panther,
Little Male Deer, Elk, Hun ka Having Wings, and Isolated Earth; TSI SHU
DIVISION: Men of Mystery, Buffalo Bull, Elder Tsi shu, Elder Sun Carri¬
ers, and Buffalo Bull Face. The five Ah ke ta formed a special council when
a Chief died or became incompetent, and it was their duty to select a new
Chief based on heredity and qualification.

In the interest of enlightenment we must mention two other types of
Protectors or soldiers. In warfare or the hunt, the Director of the Attack is
called Wa na she and his assistants are called Wa na she Shin ka or Little
Soldier. The other class of Protector was especially important in relations
between the Osages and Euro-Americans. This was the Moh shon Ah ke ta
or Protector of the Land. These soldiers had the office of protecting the
Osage domain against uninvited intruders. If an intruder harmed any ani¬
mal in the Osage domain, it was the duty of the Moh shon Ah ke ta to kill
the intruder. Failure to comprehend this Osage custom cost many Euro-
American lives. To the Osages, there was a difference between being invited
to hunt and trap and doing it without being invited. Other Indians knew

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 19

that their heads could rest on stakes if they hunted without permission in
territory claimed by the Osage. White men would have killed anyone who
slaughtered their livestock and stole their grain, but they could not under¬
stand why Osages killed hunters and trappers for doing the same thing. The
decapitated head placed on a stake to warn intruders away horrified Euro¬
peans, who apparently could not read plain signs. While we have made no
actual count, Spanish records report a modest estimate of over a thousand
white and Indian hunters and trappers that were slain as intruders in the
Osage domain. In the American period almost as many immigrant Chero-
kees lost their lives for the same reason, and they should have known better.

We would be giving a false picture of the Osages if we did not mention
the other side of the coin. If other people, Indian or white, asked for per¬
mission to hunt for food, the Osages nearly always gave their permission,
and none of them was harmed or mistreated. An outstanding example of
this occurred during the Civil War. A centuries old enemy, the Wichita,
were starving and asked for Osage permission to hunt in Osage territory.
Permission was given to these enemies because their need was great. No
Wichita was harmed or insulted until the emergency was over and the
Wichita had returned to their own territory. The hostilities then resumed
as they had existed prior to the emergency. The Wichitas knew and re¬
spected the Osages as the Osage knew and respected the Wichita. Both were
people of great honor.

Technological Developments

We have digressed somewhat from comments on the stories to show the
function of the All ke ta. Several of the stories deal with technological de¬
velopments, among them, the club, knife, and the bow.

Younger Brother, the messenger, went forth five times and brought back
a different colored flint each time. He brought back red, blue, yellow-
streaked, black, and white flint, but each kind was rejected as unsuitable. On
the sixth journey, Younger Brother found the round-handled knife, which
was accepted as the ceremonial knife.

Again, Younger Brother was sent forth; this time he was seeking material
for a ceremonial club. He brought back the smooth bark hickory, the red
oak, and the dark-wood tree (red bud), but none of these was suitable. On
his fourth trip, he brought back the willow, which was accepted as the
proper material for the ceremonial club.

They took the round-handled knife from its honored resting place. As
they did this, they noticed the knife was awe-inspiring and mysterious. So,
they decided to make Awe-Inspiring and Mysterious Knife personal names.
Now they lifted the knife and cut four strips from the willow, one for each

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

20 / Osage Origins

of the four winds. When they finished carving, the long club was shaped
like the back of a fish.

This story gives us clues as to its location. It had to be near outcrops of
limestone because of the availability of so many colors of flint. 40 The trees
also give us clues. The exact location is a problem however, because both the
limestone and trees mentioned cover all the regions the Osages inhabited,
from Pennsylvania through the Ohio Valley and west to Kansas.

More light is thrown on the knives in another story. The Black Bear clan
was custodian of the four symbolic knives. These knives were called Moh
he Se e pa bio ka (Round Handled Knife); Molt he Sop pe (Black Knife); Moh
he Hun ka (Sacred Knife); and Moh he Shu tsy (Red Knife). These knives
were originally assigned to the first four divisions. That is, the Water People,
the Earth People, the Isolated Earth People, and the Tsi shu. After Those
Who Were Last to Come merged with the Osage, the knives were reassigned.
The first two knives were reserved for the Hun ka subdivision. Both the
Wa sha she subdivision and the Tsi shu Grand Division shared the other two
knives.

When a warrior used a knife to behead an enemy, the knife he used was
considered to be mystically converted to one of the four symbolic knives.
Thus, the warrior could count his act as a war honor. In ceremonies, these
knives are often alluded to as Wa pa he or Pointed Sharp Weapons.

Perhaps one of the most frustrating things about these stories is trying to
fix a time and place for the event. Certainly, the arrow stories present this
problem. The Black Bear clan gives us the story of a strange people and
arrows. When Little Brother came to the fourth far off valley he beheld the
seven bends of a great river, wrapped in a cloud of smoke from many fires.
Through the smoke he saw seven villages, one for each bend of the river.
He cautiously crept closer so he might observe unseen the people of the
villages. After noting the tattoo marks on their foreheads and jaws and
the closely cut hair of their foreheads, he then slipped away unseen by these
strange people.

His manner of approach betrayed his excitement as he reached the out¬
skirts of his village. Noting the excitement of their Younger Brother, the
Elder Brothers ran to meet him. Radiant Star (Black Bear) related his news
as all the Hun ka, Tsi shu, and Wa sha she gathered about him.

The Tsi shu were not ready for war since they did not have a good supply
of weapons. The Wa sha she did have a good supply of weapons, especially
arrows. With the consent of all, the Little Ones went to war with these
strange people (they were probably the Iroquoian Cherokee) and eventually
defeated them.

Another isolated fragmentary myth throws more light on this story. The

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Origins / 21

Elder Wa sha she clan of the Wa sha she subdivision, conferred upon the Hun
ka clan of the Hun ka subdivision the power and authority to organize war
parties. A subclan of the Hun ka clan found the foe, when the tribe as a
whole began its warlike career. At that time, the Elder Wa sha she offered
the Hun ka the use of their seven mystic arrows with which to lay low the
foe. These mystic arrows were pointed with the antler tips of seven deer.

The two stories, one from the Black Bear and the other from the Wa sha
she, stress two different points of view. One stresses the importance of find¬
ing the enemy and the other stresses the importance of the arrows. In the
Black Bear version, we are told the Tsi shu received the arrows, but in the
Wa sha she version it was the Hun ka. This version might have been the Hun
ka (Black Bear) covering up the fact that they were also unprepared. Each
of the twenty-four clans had their own version of the stories they shared,
thus, each version presented their clan in the best possible light.

Other Stories and Legends

One must be cautious about the seven bends and seven villages in the arrow
story above. In the Osage mind, seven bends of a river symbolized life. That
is, each life has seven crises. Thus, the seven bends and seven villages repre¬
sent that this event was the first crisis in the life of the Osage people. We
can be sure it was on a notably large river, that the people wore tattoos on
the forehead and jaws, and that they wore short hair at the brow. Possibly,
these could have been Iroquoian Cherokee or even Caddos.

It is evident in these—and all the early stories, regardless of which clan
related them—that the Wa sha she was the mother group. They are always
the ultimate source of solutions. It is pure belief, but to us this suggests the
Wa sha she were Adena people. In later stories the Tsi shu become the domi¬
nant group, and this seems to indicate they were from one of the later
Woodland cultures, possibly Hopewell or Mississippian. Both the Wa sha she
and Tsi shu were more inclined toward peace than the Hun ka. This is not
to say they did not make war, but that they tended to seek peaceful solutions
in preference to warfare. The Hun ka always chose warfare as a solution to
problems. For this reason, they are thought to be either Sioux or Plano at
their roots, although they could have been Iroquoian or Algonquian. Com¬
mentary has already been made earlier on the Isolated Earth and Tsi ha she
people, and there is no need to repeat concepts of their origin again.

A great many sources have given location legends, although disagreement
as to their reliability has been raised by Carl Chapman. Because of its bear¬
ing on Osage prehistory, this problem is worth investigating. There are two
basic sources for the location legends. However, we have some indication
that the legend about living at the forks of the Ohio was given before 1754

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

22 / Osage Origins

and, therefore, could not have originated with the French and Indian War.
The earliest legend we can document comes from George Sibley, factor and
Osage Agent at Fort Osage. A second comes from H. Owen Dorsey of the
BAE. The body of literature concerning the original Osage homeland is
based primarily on these two sources. A confirming source comes from lin¬
guistic studies (discussed later in this chapter). In essence, Chapman makes
a good point in suggesting the Osages could have migrated from the south¬
west. 41 Any discussion of Osage origins must keep this possibility in mind.

We believe Dorsey and the Osage stories and legends are correct, but
until strong proof is found, no one can be certain where the old Osage
homeland was located. We can theorize that all Siouan people may have
come from New Mexico and moved northeastward with the Folsom or
Plano cultures. This could account for Chapmans belief that they came
from the south or southwest. One fact is very clear from the historic record;
the Osages had a decided preference for dissected plateau terrain on a sizable
river with a vegetative cover of prairie and woodland. The Austin area of
Texas is the only area southwest of the historic Osage homeland to have
such terrain. To the south of the Ozark Plateau the country flattens and
originally lacked prairies. The northwest also lacks such terrain.

On the other hand, the Chesapeake Piedmont-Blue Ridge area is almost
identical to the Missouri Ozarks. Along the Ohio Valley one finds this same
terrain. In the Austin area one notes some vegetative parallels, but the many
references to the vegetation in well-authenticated stories and legends rule
out this area. Pawpaws, red bud, red oak, chestnuts, and many other plants
point to the Piedmont and Ohio Valley.

In addition to the historic preference and the stories, the Osage lan¬
guage reveals their prehistoric homeland. The language is rich in woodland,
prairie, inland water, and dissected plateau words. Coastal, desert, mountain,
and dry land vegetative words are either rare or absent. Inland waters are
well represented, for example, Ne=river or water; 7 se=lake; Moh ne ski Ski
fe<7=marsh; Ka /;e=creek; and Ne ta pn=Pond. In use, these terms are further
refined by suffixes such as Shin ka. For example, the Arkansas River was
called Ne Shu tsy (Red River) and the Little Arkansas River was called Ne
Shu tsy Shin ka (Little Red River). Plant names positively indicate the Ohio
Valley, since many plants in the Osage lexicon are not native to the areas
north, south, or west of Missouri. When one adds the animal names, the
focus becomes even more centered on the Piedmont and Ohio Valley.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Osage Empire

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING
Climates

Climate is often defined as average weather in a given region. Certain spe¬
cial climates are an advantage to any culture because climate affects the
food supply and the energy of humans. Fortunately, the Osages were blessed
with a variety of climates at the peak of their empire. We are not aware of
any other North American Indians whose territory encompassed a greater
variety of climates on such a large scale. This does not include the many
small isolated climatic areas; this work considers only major climatic regions
in our discussion. The Osage domain included three types of continental
climates and one subtropical climate. These four climates were: (i) Long
Summer Humid Continental; (2) Subhumid Continental; (3) Dry Conti¬
nental; and (4) Humid Subtropical. 1

Each climate produced distinctive vegetative zones and thus provided the
Osages with a diversified food supply. Vegetation in the Long Summer Hu¬
mid Continental climate is characterized by vast hardwood forests with a
dense undergrowth. Grassy openings (prairies) are scattered throughout the
region. Hardwoods such as walnut, hickory, pecan, chestnut, hazelnut, and
oak were a source of nuts for the People of the Middle Waters. Berries and
papaws grew in the undergrowth and at the edges of prairies. Ox bow lakes,
left as remnants of old river courses, supplied lily roots and potatoes. Prairies
were especially abundant in deer, elk, and sometimes buffalo. The hills, with
their caves, sheltered many bears. When all the various factors involved are
taken into consideration, the Humid Continental climates of the world are
the most favorable climates for human activity. At the present time in man’s
history, peoples of these climates control the entire world.

Vegetation of the great Subhumid and Dry Continental climates are

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

24 / Osage Empire

usually classified as steppes or grasslands. In the Osage domain, these vege¬
tative areas are called the tall grass region and the short grass region. The
Grand Osage Prairies and Flint Hills lie in the tall grass region of the Sub-
humid Continental climate. Today, these tall grass areas produce outstanding
beef cattle, but in the 1700s they produced the best buffalo meat in North
America. The big and little bluestem grasses of these areas feed on decom¬
posed limestone soils, which make them exceptionally nutritious.

As the Indian frontier advanced, the great southern buffalo herds were
forced westward into the Dry Continental climate or short grass region.
Here, the Great Plains lie in the “rain shadow” of the lofty Front Range of
the Rocky Mountains. Moisture-greedy westerly winds clutch the available
moisture and create a dry condition on the Central Plains. Thus, the vast
steppes of Asia are duplicated in North America. Most of the domestic graz¬
ing animals of the world originated in the Asian, African, and North Ameri¬
can steppes. It was this short grass region that furnished the mainstay of the
Osage diet until after 1880 when the last survivor of the southern buffalo
herd was killed.

South China lies in a Humid Subtropical climate which supports one of
the worlds heaviest populations. In the Osage domain, this climate was
found along the southern borders in Oklahoma and Arkansas. Such climates
produce a profusion of plants useful for food and industry. Today, these cli¬
matic areas are characterized by large-scale production of specialized plants.
Rice in the Orient and cotton in the American South are typical examples.
The Osages made little use of this area other than as a barrier to southern
invasion or as a source of plunder from raids. Exotic plants native to the
Humid Subtropical climate do not appear in the Osage language. While this
is a simple, verifiable observation, it is a strong indication that the Osages
did not migrate from the south. This would also suggest only an indirect
contact with the Mississippian culture at Spiro, Oklahoma, although the
mounds there were located within the Osage domain in historic times.

Another significant observation is the fact that all the main Osage vil¬
lages were located in the Humid Continental climate. From this core area,
as recorded in history, they expanded south and west into other climatic
regions. Even after they had added vast areas of other climates to their do¬
main, they continued to live in the Humid Continental climate, although
the Claremore bands lived on the extreme southern boundary of that cli¬
matic zone. From their bases in the Humid Continental climate, the Osages
could control territory in other climatic regions.

We do not want to make any exaggerated claims about the role of cli¬
mate on human activity, but we must acknowledge some effects of climate.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 25

Anyone who has experienced the surge of vigor on a crisp fall day and the
lassitude of a warm spring day is aware that weather affects our energy. The
frequent shifts in weather so characteristic of the Humid Continental cli¬
mate apparently stimulate the peoples of this region. Thus, they tend to be
energetic and intellectually active. This, in turn, tends to drive them to ex¬
cel in whatever they undertake. There is no doubt that the Osages excelled
in most of their ventures. Their achievements in creating their empire tes¬
tify to this fact. Certainly, their diet was varied and abundant. When all five
of the elements of the physical environment are considered, the Osages still
stand out as an energetic, mentally active people.

Elements of the Physical Environment

Yet, the other elements of the physical environment must also be taken into
account. Aside from the number one element of climate, the other elements
are: (2) Relative location on the earth; (3) Land forms; (4) Bodies of water;
(5) Soils and minerals. 2 These four geographical factors, combined with a
favorable climate, placed the Osages in a favorable position to achieve ex¬
cellence.

Assuming outside social or technological factors do not intrude and, in
effect, cancel the geographic factors, a nation may possess all these factors
but one and still never rise to the status of a great power because of this
missing factor. One of the most critical factors in a nation s rise is its relative
location in relation to other nations, the sea, certain land forms, or a multi¬
tude of other geographic relationships. The Osage compact core area in west
central Missouri was very favorably located for the time preceding 1800.
After 1800, with the coming of the Euro-Americans, political, social, and
technological changes radically reduced the geographic advantages which
had favored the Osages before that time.

In 1907, at a meeting of the American Historical Association, Miss Ellen
Churchill Semple set forth some principles of the relation of geography to
history. Among other comments, she made the following statement: “The
location of a country is the supreme geographical fact in its history. The
dispersion of people over a wide, boundless area has a disintegrating ten¬
dency, while the opposite result follows concentration within a restricted
national base. A people situated between two other peoples generally form
an ethnical and cultural link between the two. . . . [Concentration] means
opportunity for widening territory and the exercise of a widespread influ¬
ence, but it also means danger.” 3

Centrally located as they were on the major mid-American rivers (see
Fig. 4), the Osages were surrounded by a large number of different peoples.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 4. Notice the central location of the Osage villages.

Osage Empire / 27

Thus, they had the means to acquire a wider range of ideas than would be
available to a more isolated people. The general cultures of the Northeastern
tribes and Southeastern tribes differed from each other. Differences be¬
tween those to the north of the Osages and those to the south also existed.
Indians to the west differed from those of the northeast, southeast, north and
south of the Osage homeland. Because of this, the Osages were cosmopoli¬
tan in many facets of their culture. Since virtually all the North American
Indian cultures were basically continental cultures, this made the midconti¬
nent location of the Osages especially significant.

The location of the Osages at the northwestern edge of the Ozark Uplift
was also a great advantage. Uplifted plateaus, such as the Ozarks, are among
the most rugged land forms known to man. History records that a hand¬
ful of Spartans seriously delayed a vast Persian army at the narrow pass of
Thermopylae. In the battle of Saratoga, Benedict Arnold and Daniel Mor¬
gan, with only a brigade and one rifle company, defeated General James
Burgoyne’s army at Freeman’s farm during the American Revolution. These
are only two examples of how rough terrain can enable a small force to
repel a large force. An invading military force is always at a disadvantage
in terrain such as the Ozarks. Utilization of the Ozark terrain gave the
Osages security from an invading force large enough to inflict severe dam¬
age upon them.

On the north boundary of the Osage domain the Missouri River flowed,
and, on the east, the Mississippi formed a barrier. To the land-bound Indians,
these rivers were formidable barriers. Even those who used the dugout ca¬
noes were unable to cross these barriers with enough men to overcome the
Osage military force. On the south, the Arkansas River formed a lesser bar¬
rier to invasion, but the Ozarks precluded an invasion from the south. Only
to the west lay an open invasion route. Even here, a retreat into the Ozarks
would have forestalled a fruitful invasion.

The fortress, which was their homeland, provided a secure base for Osage
expansion. It is worth noting that this base also lay across three of the four
routes to the American West—the two river routes of the Missouri and
Arkansas Rivers and the ancient Continental Trail. For over a century and
a quarter, the Osages denied the effective use of these routes to Euro-
Americans. Only the western portion of the Continental Trail which lay
beyond Osage territory was ever used by Euro-Americans to reach the Far
West. Historians of the American Frontier rarely take notice of this well-
developed, all-land route to the American West that existed centuries before
Columbus discovered America.

While the west offered an invasion route, it also offered an expansion

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

28 / Osage Empire

route. The northern and eastern nations could not successfully invade the
Osage domain, but by the same token, the Osages could not expand into
their territory. Lack of buffalo to the south caused the Osages to shun the
area except to plunder the less energetic southern nations. To the immediate
west, the Caddoean peoples had been firmly established for at least two
hundred years. Their culture was very different from the stereotype of the
Plains Indians.

On the prairies and plains that lie between the 95th and 100th meridians
and between the Canadian River and the Kansas River watershed are many
river valleys. In effect, these form a different geographic province from the
Great Plains that surround them. It was in these valleys of the Plains that the
Caddoean peoples built their stockaded grass lodge villages and tilled their
crops. They were not the nomadic, tepee dwelling buffalo hunters so often
pictured. They did hunt buffalo and other game, but they were predomi¬
nantly sedentary farmers.

Therein lies an important distinction between the Siouan Osages and
the Caddoean Pawnee, Wichita, and Tonkawa. The Osages cultivated food
plants, but they were primarily hunters. Behind the Osages lay centuries
of experience in warfare. Among the Caddos, warfare was a matter of
“forting-up” until an attack was abandoned; they had little experience in
aggressive warfare.

Combined with the Osage expansion from the east was an expansion
from the west of Caddoean territory. The horse gave mountain peoples, such
as the Comanche, Kiowa, Cheyenne, and Lipan Apache, the mobility they
needed to move onto the Plains. Like the Osage, these people were hunters
and well experienced in warfare. Therefore, they too expanded at the ex¬
pense of the Caddoean people.

By 1750, the Osages had driven many of the Caddoean people south
of the Red River. The mountain people had slowed Osage expansion at
roughly the 100th meridian. At its legally recognized size, the Osage empire
included half or more of Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, and Oklahoma. It was
bounded on the east by the Mississippi. The north boundary followed the
Missouri River across Missouri and then the northern limits of the Arkan¬
sas River watershed. On the south, the Arkansas and Canadian Rivers
formed the boundary. East of the 100th meridian was undisputed Osage
territory. West of the 100th to the Front Range was disputed territory, as
was the area south of the Arkansas and the Canadian.

Soils and minerals were both diverse and plentiful in the Osage domain.
The Missouri, Neosho Grand, Verdigris, and Arkansas Valleys contain some
of the richest farm soils in America. While the limestone bedrock lies too
close to the surface for farming on the Flint Hills, the bluestem grasses of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 29

this region more than rival the famed Kentucky bluegrass as a grazing re¬
gion. It was the presence of this grass that drew the buffalo, who grew sleek
and fat on rich bluestem. These in turn, drew the Osages westward from the
Ozarks.

Minerals and rocks useful to the Osages were abundant in the finest
quality. Flints, cherts, crystalline quartz, jasperoid, sandstone, pipestone, and
clays were easily found. Possibly the largest concentration of flint and chert
in the world is found in the Ozarks and the Flint Hills. The purest, clearest
natural quartz crystals ever seen by man were found in the Osage domain.
Missouri grindstones are world famous, as are the novaculite sharpening
stones. Black pipestone was found in Neosho County, Kansas. Firing clays
of kaolin, volcanic, and other clays are plentiful in the old Osage domain, as
the many ceramic industries of today testify.

The largest lead and zinc mining district in the world, as well as large
coal seams, lies near the center of the old Osage empire. The productive
Mid-Continent Oil Field lies under their lands. At Magnet Cove Arkansas,
thirty-two different minerals, including the nation’s largest barium mine
are found in a fifteen square mile area. Osages had discretionary control
of the Murfreesboro, Arkansas, area, where the only diamonds in North
America are found.

More useful to the Osages were the many calcite and other gypsum de¬
posits found throughout their domain; with these they could bleach deer¬
skins. Salt was so valuable in Roman times that it was used as money to pay
the legions. From this practice we get the word salary, Latin for salt. Many
saline springs and the Great Salt Plains gave the Osages a surplus of salt.

Apparently, plants and animals were available to the Osages in a greater
variety and profusion than to other Indian people. Roger Ward Babson, a
twentieth-century economic statistician, located his Golden Triangle near
Eureka, Kansas, which was near to the center of Osage civilization, deep
within their lands. He claimed everything humans needed for survival was
obtainable within this triangle. 4 No wonder they called their domain “the
center of the earth.” Such great gifts of Wa kon ta Ke (The Mysterious
Being of the Universe) were not ignored by the Osages. They considered
themselves to be caretakers appointed by the Mysterious Being to protect
these gifts.

Because of a favorable combination of geographical factors, the Osages
became the dominant force in mid-America. This and their institutions
made the Osages a force that shaped the history of the American West. For
over one hundred years, they blocked the westward expansion of the Euro¬
pean powers. As late as 1800, they still had the military power to destroy all
European settlements on the Middle Waters. Even after they were over-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

30 / Osage Empire

whelmed by a deluge of Euro-American intruders and migrant Indian na¬
tions from the east, they still could divert the tide of western movement to
the north and south of their domain. It was no accident that in 1893 the
American Frontier ended within the bounds of the old Osage empire.

OSAGE EXPANSION
Introduction

There were three Osage core groups. The northernmost group was the
Little Osages who lived between Malta Bend and Glasgow in Missouri. Ap¬
parently, the mother group of the remaining Osages were those who had
their permanent villages along the Osage River in Missouri. Through most
of recorded history, before 1822, this group lived near the junction of the
Little Osage and Osage Rivers. Between 1775 and 1796, the third group
consisted of random bands of Osages who tended to live on the headwaters
of the Pomme de Terre, Niangua, Sac, and White Rivers in Missouri and
Arkansas. It was these random bands that formed around Town Maker
(Claremore II) in the late-i700s. By 1800, they were known as the People
of the Oaks or the Claremore bands. However, they were also called the
Arkansas bands. Their villages were located on the lower Neosho-Grand
River and the Verdigris in Oklahoma. From these villages, Osage expansion
extended southward and westward. Generally, the Arkansas bands pushed
southward as far as Natchitoches, Louisiana, and southwestward to Lawton,
Oklahoma. The Little Osage and Osage River bands pushed as far west as
the Front Range in Colorado and southwestward as far as the Texas Pan¬
handle. This is not to say that they established firm control as far as these
extreme areas, but only that their war parties probed as far as these ex¬
tremes. Spanish records show the Osages sometimes raided as far southwest
as Santa Fe. 5

Osage expansion into the south and west took place between 1700 and
1800 (see Fig. 5). Accounts of Coronados Expedition in 1341 tell us the Cad-
doean peoples occupied the area included in Osage expansion. While Euro-
American accounts frequently refer to these Caddo as Wichita, Osage oral
history accounts, with few exceptions, refer to them as Pawnee. Since the
Osage names for geographic features also reflect a Pawnee presence, we will
follow the Osage custom.

By 1700, the Osages had made the Kansas part of the Neosho-Grand
Valley their own. At about this date, they had reduced the easternmost
Pawnee stronghold and were probing the east bank of the Arkansas River
near Newkirk, Oklahoma. The Pawnee stronghold at the junction of the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 5. Osage expansion shows a steady advancement. Note the difference between the maxi¬
mum expansion and the area recognized by the United States government in 1820.

32 / Osage Empire

Fall and Verdigris Rivers (Neodesha, Kansas) had held the Osages back for
sometime.

This fort or stronghold was at a strategic point on what was later called
the First Buffalo Trail by the Osages. The section between the Vernon
County, Missouri, villages and the Pawnee fort was merely a feeder trail to
the main Continental Trail. From the Pawnee fort, the First Buffalo Trail
followed an alternate Continental Trail to the Arkansas River, crossing near
Newkirk, Oklahoma. From this crossing, the First Buffalo Trail went west¬
ward to the Salt Plains. However, the alternate Continental Trail followed
the Arkansas River upstream to the Wichita villages at the mouth of the
Little Arkansas River, where it rejoined the main Continental Trail.

Wars of Expansion
Blu ff War

Characteristically, the Osages fought the Caddo peoples in “bluff paint.”
That is, the upper half of the face was black or red and the lower half yellow.
Bluff war, among the Osages, consisted of baiting an enemy to fight; the
most common bait was insults. Since the Caddo did not speak Osage, and
because conversations were delivered at a long bowshot between the two
parties, “finger talk” was used. 6 Oral Osage has no curse words or foul lan¬
guage. However, finger talk could be used to convey extremely vile, insult¬
ing concepts.

At first glance, bluff war may seem to be a poor strategy for territorial
conquest. But no one who is aware of the Osage knowledge of human char¬
acter would doubt the effectiveness of bluff war. They were well aware of
the Caddo tendency to seek shelter in their palisaded villages at the first
sign of an unfriendly war party. Osage boys sometimes amused themselves
by pretending to be a war party, just to see the panic they created, but for a
real war party, it was not an idle game. Anytime an Osage put black or red
(depending on the Grand Division) paint on any part of his face an enemy
could easily lose his life or face capture and being sold as a slave to the
Southeastern tribes. The latter alternative was often used since the Osages
did not believe in taking any form of life needlessly. Osage warriors knew
the effects of repressed anger and wounded pride as the result of repeated
insults. They also knew that if the pressure became too great, the Pawnee
would come out to fight. Such action led to death or capture of the Pawnee.
If they were killed, their heads were cut off and placed on stakes as a warn¬
ing to other Pawnee to leave or die. In time, the harassed Caddo moved
away to salvage the remaining shreds of their abused pride, to save their
lives, or to escape slavery. Each move made the next move easier to justify.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 33

Through the strategy of bluff war, the Osages gained a large portion of
Caddo territory with very little loss of life on either side. Some idea of the
Osage feeling in this matter can be gained from the name they gave to Pond
Creek in present-day Osage County, Oklahoma. It was called Poor Pawnee
Creek because the Osages killed a stray, half-starved Pawnee on this creek.
They were so ashamed of themselves for killing the Pawnee needlessly that
they always paid honor to him when they passed his grave by placing another
stone on the grave. In the Osage mind, this was the poor Pawnee s creek.

Ferdinandina

In the area near Newkirk, Oklahoma, a cluster of Pawnee villages stood at
the historic crossing (called 777 Ka ha [Deer Creek]) of the alternate Conti¬
nental Indian Trail. The French built a stockaded trading post here in Sep¬
tember of 1719 and named it Ferdinandina. 7 This post was a barrier to the
Osage advance as long as it existed. The Osages could have destroyed the
post, but diplomacy of the time dictated otherwise. Destruction of Ferdi¬
nandina would have cut off the supply of trade goods and guns entering
the eastern borders of their domain. Not only was Ferdinandina a barrier to
their westward expansion but it was also a breech in the Osage blockade of
trade goods to the Indian nations of the Plains. So Ferdinandina had to be
either eliminated or reduced to a post of no consequence.

With typical Osage “searching with the mind,” they conceived a strategy
to reduce Ferdinandina without rupturing relations with the French. Since
an open assault on the post would disrupt trade with the French, this was to
be avoided until a later time. Between the establishment of Ferdinandina in
1719 and its fall in 1757, 8 the Osages concentrated their expansion south¬
ward. They crossed the Arkansas River between Arkansas Post and Ferdi¬
nandina at many points. River traffic between these two points was severely
disrupted and the Caddoean peoples were pushed to the south side of the
Red River. By 1749, the Osages had virtually cleared the Caddo out of the
area between the Red River and the Arkansas-Canadian Rivers in Okla¬
homa and western Arkansas. French traders of the Caddo followed them and
founded the twin villages of San Bernardo and San Teodoro on the Red
River. 9

Ferdinandina never became a major trading post because its shipments of
hides and tallow as well as trade goods were often seized by the Osages. This
was an overriding factor in the decision not to reopen Ferdinandina after
the Osages took the post in 1757. By this time the post was so unimportant
that the French ignored the seizure. This would have been the attitude of
the French even if France had not been involved in the French and Indian

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

34 / Osage Empire

War. The French could ill afford to alienate the most powerful military
force in mid—America over an insignificant trading post. The Osages were
well aware of this when they seized the post. Their strategy had ultimately
yielded their objective.

Maximum Expansion

With the capture of Ferdinandina, the Osages again turned their expansion
to the west. The Great Salt Plains were firmly in Osage hands by 1760.
By 1770-1775, they had a good claim as far west as the 100th meridian
and north to the Arkansas-Smoky Hill River divide. They also had domin¬
ion as far south as the Canadian River and down the Red River as far as
Natchitoches. Most of the Caddoean peoples of the South-Central Plains
had been compacted into the area between the Red River and the Gulf of
Mexico.

As we have already mentioned, the Osages tried not to take life unnec¬
essarily. During their expansion, many Pawnee were captured. Some of
these captives were adopted and became Osage; many more were traded as
slaves to the Cherokee and Muskhogean nations in the southeastern United
States. The French made no effort to stop this slave trade but in the waning
days of Osage expansion, the Spanish caused this trade to cease. 10 Contrary
to reports that the Osages had slaves, they did not hold any slaves. Their
captives were either adopted or sold and rarely killed, but they did not keep
slaves.

At the southwest edge of the Osage domain were the Southern Chey¬
enne. In the Texas Panhandle, the Comanche barred Osage expansion. To the
west were the Kiowa and Apache of the Plains (Lipan Apache). Bluff war
was not very effective against any of these people. Like the Osage, they had
a long tradition as hunters, and they were experienced in warfare. When the
Osages went to war against these people they customarily wore black paint.
Both black and red symbolized the merciless fire that consumed all in its
path. If an Osage wore black or red paint over the entire head or body, it
meant an all-out, no quarter war. One of the Little Osage chiefs had the
valor name of Chetopa (Tsi To pa [Four Lodges]). He led a war party that
killed every man, woman, and child in four lodges of Kiowa. Their heads
were left in brass buckets as a warning to refrain from hunting in Osage
territory or trading with people who brought trade goods south from the
Platte River route.

The Kiowa and Apache gave way before this ruthless warfare. They
sought shelter in the Wichita Mountains of southwestern Oklahoma. While
this was Cheyenne territory, the need of the Kiowa and Apache was great

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 35

and the Cheyenne needed the extra warriors to hold back the Osages. Thus,
the three nations combined to stem the expansion of the Osages into the
Southwest.

Although the Osages took insignificant amounts of territory from the
Cheyenne or Comanche, they halted the eastward movement of these people.
On November 27, 1868, the Osages brought a crushing blow to the South¬
ern Cheyenne. Under the leadership of Tally and Hard Rope, the Osages led
George A. Custer and the 7th Cavalry to the camp of Black Kettle. In an
unusual act, Custer heeded the advice of his Osage scouts and struck the
Cheyenne at dawn. From Custers description of the Osage face paint we
know that the Cheyenne had killed an Osage from the sky division. From
movements prior to the engagement we also know they had hunted in
Osage territory without permission. The destruction of the Black Kettle
band was complete. 11 It was at this battle of the Washita that Custer ac¬
quired his reputation as an Indian fighter. Without the Osage scouts, Custer
and the 7th Cavalry would not have been alive to fight at the Little Big
Horn. There is a story among the Osages that a single Osage scout was with
Custer on the Little Big Horn. The story claims that when Custer ignored
their advice, the Osage and a Delaware scout pulled their blankets over their
heads and slipped away before the Sioux struck.

Place in United States History
Effect on Louisiana Purchase

In a one hundred twenty-five year period, 1678-1803, the Osages per¬
formed a feat no other American Indians duplicated. They stopped the west¬
ward expansion of the Euro-American peoples and simultaneously tripled
the size of their own domain. One may expect that a people of such great
capability would have some significant effect on the history of the United
States.

It is significant that Cape Girardeau and Ste. Genevieve, Missouri, tasted
success before St. Louis. Both were located on branches of the Continen¬
tal Trail while St. Louis was not. The Continental Trail was the shortest,
most direct route to the far west. This trail ran from the Atlantic Seaboard
through the Osage domain and on to the Rio Grande settlements and the
Pacific. As late as 1825, the Santa Fe Trail skirted the northern and western
fringes of the Osage nation so it could follow the Continental Trail on into
Santa Fe. Zealous protection of the Osage domain had diverted the flow of
trade and westward movement to the north and south of the Osage terri¬
tory even before the Americans had appeared on the scene. These routes had
been restricted in their use by the Osage blockade on the lower Missouri

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 6. Note that the trails were used only after the Osages ceded the area.

Osage Empire / 37

and Arkansas Rivers. Thus, neither France nor Spain had been able to open
overland or river routes to the Pacific. They also did not establish a foothold
in the areas west of the Osage empire or within the Osage domain. While
other factors may have had some effect on this situation, the Osage effect
cannot be denied (see Fig. 6).

One can only speculate on the fate of the United States if either France
or Spain had been able to establish a firm control over the Osages. At the
very least, the United States would have been confined to the area east of
the Mississippi, for either France or Spain would have controlled the Missis¬
sippi. Quite possibly, the very existence of the United States would have
been doubtful. However, because of the Osage nation, neither France nor
Spain became firmly established on the Middle Waters. Hence, the vast
reaches of the American West was available to the United States when she
was best able to capitalize on it.

Natural Rights Philosophy

Some Americans are not aware of the origins of natural rights philosophy
and the role this has had in the creation of the United States. The idea of
humans living in harmony with themselves and nature stimulated the phi¬
losophers of France and England. From reports of Indian cultures, they con¬
ceived a line of thought that was different from any other line of thought
in the history of Western civilization. After the passing influence of the
American Indian, however, Western philosophy reverted to the traditional
trend of Western thought regarding the individual’s relationship to the State.
Thomas Jefferson summed up the trend of natural rights thought when he
wrote, “men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.”
Thus, American Indian governmental practices became the base for Ameri¬
can government.

In 1725, Bourgmont took a group of Little Osages and their kindred
Missourias to Paris, France. We cannot document that Charles de Montes¬
quieu actually visited with these Indians. However, it is inconceivable that
he would miss the opportunity to question them since he was in Paris at the
time. In 1748 he published The Spirit of Lam. Coincidence or not, in this
work, he describes some core principles of Osage and Missouria govern¬
ment. 12 Because of their significance to our subject, we include four quotes
from The Spirit of Laws that touch upon Osage ideas.

The law of nations is naturally founded on this principle, that dif¬
ferent nations ought in time of peace to do one another all the good
they can, and in time of war as little injury as possible, without preju¬
dicing their real interests.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

38 / Osage Empire

Virtue in a republic is a most simple thing: it is a love of the repub¬
lic; it is a sensation, and not a consequence of acquired knowledge.

These people enjoy great liberty; for as they do not cultivate the
earth, they are not fixed: they are wanderers and vagabonds; and if a
chief should deprive them of their liberty, they would immediately go
and seek it under another, or retire into the woods, and there live with
their families. The liberty of the man is so great among these people
that it necessarily draws after it that of the citizen.

The division of lands is what principally increases the civil code.
Among nations where they have not made this division there are very
few civil laws.

The institutions of these people may be called manners rather than
laws.

Among such nations as these the old men, who remember things
past, have great authority; they cannot therefore be distinguished by
wealth, but by wisdom and valor.

No one has ever made a better summary of the basic Osage governmen¬
tal principles than Montesquieu. In times of peace, the Osages traded with
their neighbors and helped them. In times of war, they tried not to take life
unnecessarily. The Osages have a love for each other. This takes the form of
caring, and, as Montesquieu states, it is a matter of feeling and not of the
intellect. Although it is sometimes called the tribal bond, it is more accu¬
rately called love.

Land allotment was opposed by the Osages; they were the last Indians in
Oklahoma to allot their lands. Early visitors always mentioned how well-
mannered the Osages were. They did not interrupt each other in speech and
treated each other with courtesy. In the last paragraph of the last quote,
Montesquieu seems to be describing none other than the Society of Little
Old Men. Since the existence of this society was not generally known to
Euro-Americans until the late-i8oos, one wonders where Montesquieu got
this information, if not from the Osages.

American frontier historians universally point out that the strongest sup¬
port for the American Revolution came from the frontier. But how can one
account for such widespread support from a generally illiterate people who
had little comprehension of governmental principles and scant exposure to
natural rights philosophy? The only logical answer lies in their close ac¬
quaintance with the American Indian. In fact, more than one Euro-American
joined the Indians to escape the restrictive laws of Western civilization and
live the freer life of the Indians.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 39

Osage Government

Gentile Government

DIVISION

Limited executive
arid Judicial
powers

(1) Keeps domes¬
tic pease

(2) Tiles to pre¬
serve lives

(3) Selects K1 he
kaAhketa

LITTLE OLD MEN

Legislative, executive. Judicial, and religious powers

''ALL CEREMONIES

Holds aD residual
powers

(1) Selects war
and hunt
leaders

(2) Sets foreign
policy

(3) Selects Moh
shcnAhkc ta

COUNCIL OF AH KE TA
Selects new Division Chiefs

Fig. 7. This first part of Osage government shows the gentile government, which was
the only government that applied to all the people.

OSAGE VILLAGES AND CAMPS

In order to fully grasp the importance of Osage villages in the lives of the
people, some background about Osage tribal organization is helpful. The
gentile organization, physical divisions, and overlapping bands of the Osage
were among the most intricate in North America. To a great extent, this
complicated organization was a result of the large number of Osage people.
This group probably constituted one of the larger nations in North America
to function as a single unit.

The most influential group among the Osages was the Ne ke a Shin ka or
Society of Little Old Men (see Fig. 7). They controlled the gentile organi¬
zation, the religious ceremonies, and were the living libraries of Osage his¬
tory. From the position of actual power, the next in importance were the
individual band chiefs, who existed outside the gentile system. When one
considers prestige and respect as a measure of importance, the Gentile Di¬
vision Chiefs must be considered more important than the band chiefs. Al¬
though physical divisions stood between the gentile organization and the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

40 / Osage Empire

bands, they were separate from both. The physical divisions had probably
existed before the people had formed into bands.

Without any doubt, the twenty-four clans and their numerous subclans
that made up the gentile system were the oldest units of tribal organization.
Likewise, they were the glue that held the Osage people together as one
people. It was the blood ties of mutual kinship within each clan and its
subdivisions that kept the Osages a united people. The gentile rule against
marriages within a clan or its subdivisions linked the twenty-four clans to¬
gether through marriages. That is, one could not marry within his or her
own clan or subclans, nor could one marry within his or her own subdivi¬
sion without some exceptional reason. There were two Grand Divisions
and five subdivisions, so it was easy to follow these rules. In many ways,
the gentile organization functioned as a national or central government.
Representation in the gentile council (Little Old Men) was acquired by
achievement and ability, except that a member’s widow took his place when
he died. Such women had to be intelligent and capable because none of the
Little Old Men would have married her if she had been otherwise. In effect,
this council was an unicameral legislature with a considerable amount of
executive and judicial powers, especially in external matters (those matters
concerning relationships with other nations).

The executive branch of the gentile government was vested in two
moiety or division Chiefs. While these Chiefs possessed both executive and
judicial powers, they were strictly limited to internal peace-keeping func¬
tions. Each Chief selected five Ah ke ta Ki he ka (Chief Protectors). When
it was necessary to select a new Chief because of death or incompetence,
these five Ah ke ta formed a Council of Ah ki tas. As many as twenty Moll
short Ah ke ta or Moh slum ka shay (Protectors of the Land) may have existed
at any given time. Chief Protectors and Protectors of the Land were the
only standing military force permitted. The duty of the Protector of the
land was to conserve and protect resources, especially from intruders. 13 In
carrying out the function of their office, these soldiers often upset Euro-
American plans.

Physical Divisions formed the next layer of organization. No real func¬
tion for this layer of government has been recorded. Some intermediate role
is suggested because of the alignment of the Physical Divisions. It seems
that formerly this layer may have acted much as provincial governments.
Sometime in the Osage past they were caught in a great sudden flood. In
seeking safety, the clans were dispersed. Those who stayed on low hum¬
mocks on the flood plain and survived were called Heart Stays People.
Some climbed trees to save themselves and were named Tree Sitters. A third
group found salvation on the slopes of a nearby hill and were called the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 41

Down Under People. The first two groups and about half of the third group
moved away from the others and in time were called Little Bone Osages.
Others found safety in a thorny, bushy side valley which caused them to be
called the Thorny Bush People. The final group succeeded in climbing to
the top of a forested hill. These Osages were called Upland Forest People.
The Thorny Bush, Upland Forest, and many of the Down Under People
were known collectively as Big Hills. These people were also sometimes
called Big Bone Osages. As time passed, the bone was dropped from the
Little Bone Osage and Big Bone Osage names.

Since the great flood divided the clans by spreading their members
among the various Physical Divisions, a precedence was established for
bands to also cross clan lines. At one time after the flood, the Little Osages
and the Big Osages apparently had established governing units for each
group. Certainly, the Little Osages had a head chief over all the Little Osage
bands, as has been mentioned in written history. For all practical purposes,
many of the twenty-four clans were represented within each of these two
groups. An Osage band usually consisted of members from two or more
clans. In some respects the Bear and its kindred Panther clan could be con¬
sidered as a single-clan band, but in accuracy it was a two-clan band.

Bands were led by a chief who was selected by the people he led. Those
who did not choose to follow this chief simply moved to a band led by a
chief they wanted to follow. This voting with the feet caused some mobility
among the various bands. Careful formal limitation and checks which were
exercised with Division Chiefs did not apply to band chiefs. A band chiefs
power was limited only by the people he led. Since he led only by the
consent of the governed, if he abused his power, he had no people to lead.
The consent of the people he led could be withdrawn simply by their
choice to follow another leader (see Fig. 8).

These band chiefs were the masters of local government. More often
than not, the band chiefs were very capable and did an outstanding job of
taking care of the people in their bands. 14 What characterizes the Osage
government is its outstanding trait of caring for its people. This reciprocal
caring between the people and their leaders ties the Osages to each other
even today. Osages walking in the world today and working at a chosen
profession, trade, or craft may appear to be just ordinary American citizens,
but these people know in their hearts that they belong to a people who care
about them; the person is Osage. This is not a matter of blood quantum, but
it is a matter of the heart and conviction; it is the tribal bond. Osages have
always throughout time had this caring bond with each other. No Osage has
ever walked alone. If one grasps the complexities of the preceding explana¬
tions, the importance of communication among the Osage villages will be

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

42 / Osage Empire

Osage Government

Three Groups of Bands

WHITE HAIR BANDS

Tsi shu Division Chief and Head Band Chief combined
In the same leader

LITTLE OSAGE BANDS
Head Band Chief also one of three band chiefs

CLAREMORE BANDS

Hun ka Division Chief and Head Band Chief separate.
Head Band Chief also one of band chiefs

(1) Makes war—"

(2) Keeps domestic
peace

(3) Sets rules of
the hunt

BANDS
Selects Chiefs

-BAND CHIEFS -

-(4) Selects one
of them¬
selves as
Head Band
.Chief

HEAD BAND CHIEF
Cordlnates activities of his bands

Fig. 8. Part two of Osage government shows the three groups of bands and band gov¬
ernment. These governments applied only to the members of a particular band.

appreciated. It is the association with each other that creates the tribal bond.
Osage warriors admired the wolf’s ability to stay away from his home for
long periods of time. This the warriors could not do. They were very at¬
tached to their homes and associates.

Types of Communities

There were four basic types of Osage communities. The villages of the
Gentile Division Chiefs represent the first type. Originally the Division
Chiefs lived in the same village with the Tsi shu (Sky) Chief on the north
side and the Hun ka (Earth) Chief on the south side of an east-west street.
Lodges of the Division Chiefs were always in the middle of the villages,
and the same was true of the band chiefs. References to the House in
the Middle always refer to the dwelling of a Division Chief. Apparently,
at some time near 1800, the Division Chiefs started living in separate
villages—the Sky Chief lived with the White Hair bands and the Earth
Chief lived with the Claremore bands. However, one must be aware that

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 43

Town Maker (Claremore II) was a head band chief and was not the Earth
Division Chief. Since he was from the Sky Peacemaker clan, he could not
be a Grand Earth Division Chief. An Earth Division Chief, by law, had to
come from the Ponca Peacemaker clan, and, conversely, a Sky Division
Chief had to come from the Sky Peacemaker clan.

Band villages were a second type of community and they varied greatly
in size. Both the Division Chief villages and the band villages were as per¬
manent as the fuel, water, game, sanitation, wild food plants, and tillage area
allowed. A third type of community was semipermanent because they were
used only for the seasonal grand hunts. Under normal conditions, the Osages
engaged in three grand hunts each year. The spring and fall grand hunts
took place out on the Plains to kill buffalo. 15 In the early winter, a third
grand hunt took place for bear, deer, and elk. Groups of hunters entered
caves to take bears that were in early hibernation and, thus, still in prime
condition. These grand hunts differed from other hunting in that they were
highly organized and systematic, involving all able-bodied persons in a
group. Individual hunts were not permitted during a grand hunt. That is,
hunting outside the organized grand hunt was not allowed. Free or indi¬
vidual hunting was encouraged at other times, however.

In a semipermanent community the framework of the wickiups were
left in place and reused on the next hunt. Hide covers were carried from
camp to camp. The fourth and last type of community was tepee commu¬
nities. The Osages rarely used tepees. In most instances, they were used only
when the Osages hunted west of the iooth meridian. Here, materials to
construct wickiups were hard to find and the portable tepee became a ne¬
cessity. These tepee communities left little, if any, sign of their passing, ex¬
cept a ring of stones or sod. Locations of any of these tepee communities
cannot be pinpointed since their signs did not last longer than a year.

Migration Concept

Before we can discuss the location of Osage village sites we must explain a
problem these sites reveal. If we accept the idea that the Chesapeake Pied¬
mont was the Osage homeland and that they entered Missouri from the
Ohio Valley, a possible inconsistency must be resolved. According to legends,
the Dhegiha and Chewere moved west together. Since the Chewere moved
west between the Great Lakes and the Ohio River, this would suggest
that the Osages entered Missouri from north of the Ohio Valley. Yet, both
historic accounts and village sites tend to suggest a southeastern Missouri
entry.

Due to the close relationship between the Dhegiha and Chewere we be¬
lieve they were once a united people who started west together. A split,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

44 / Osage Empire

possibly at or near the mouth of the Wabash or Illinois River, may have sent
the Chewere westward into Iowa while the Dhegiha moved southwestward
down the Mississippi to the site of Kaskaskia, Illinois. Although only the
Osages have the flood tradition and the other Dhegiha have none, we be¬
lieve the sudden flood was on the Ohio. That the other Dhegiha groups
were located above the flood plain in the Ohio or Kentucky highlands is
very probable. It is unlikely that the Osages would have been caught in an
ordinary flood situation. The legend states very clearly that the flood was
sudden and unexpected.

Although the Ohio is notorious for flooding due to rain storms from the
southwest that move upstream, it is certain that the Osages were aware of
this and would have taken steps to protect themselves. Two situations in the
Ohio Valley could have caught the Osages unprepared. One is the reflux of
water due to an earthquake and the other is the breaking of an ice dam. No
mention is made of the earth shaking in the myth so the breaking of an ice
dam at the forks of the Ohio seems to be a likely cause of a sudden and
unexpected flood. While the Missouri River has ice dams, they are not so
severe as those on the Ohio.

We know the Little Osages and the Big Osages lived apart from each
other after the flood. It is also known that the Little Osages had a closer re¬
lationship with the Missouri and Illinois than the Big Osages had with these
tribes. Likewise, there was a closer relationship between the Big Osages and
the Quapaw than there was between the Little Osages and Quapaw. With
this background, it seems reasonable to suggest that the two Osage groups
may have entered Missouri at two different points.

In view of the splintering taking place among the Dhegiha and Chewere,
it is not unreasonable to suppose the Little Osages elected to live on the
north side of the Ohio Valley. Nor would it be out of character for the Big
Osages to move along the south side of the valley with the Quapaw. I do
not suggest that the Little Osages ever severed their gentile relationships
with the Big Osages. From their own legends, the Up River People (Omaha
and Ponca) apparently followed about the same route as the Chewere. No
obstacle seems to exist to the belief that the Little Osages and the later
Kansas splinter could have followed a route slightly south of these people.

As a matter of observation, in most sudden flood situations, fewer people
reach the highlands than those who do not. Yet, the historic record shows
the Big Osages outnumbering the Little Osages more than two to one.
On the surface, this suggests a sizable decimation of the Little Osages be¬
cause the numbers should at least be equal. Almost without exception, the
Osage Kott za clan members are Big Osages. Since there are very few Kansas
clan members among the Little Osages, it seems apparent that the Kon za

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 45

clan members and their followers splintered off from the Little Osages and
reformed as the core of the Kansas nation.

Archaeological evidence reveals that the Little Osage sites on the Mis¬
souri River and in Vernon County, Missouri, show a strong relationship to
the Orr focus of the Oneota aspect. Yet the Big Osage sites show very little,
if any, relationship to the Oneota aspect. This appears to be a clear indication
that the Little Osages had experienced a closer contact with the Oneota
than had the Big Osages. Thus, there is some justification for suggesting that
the Little Osages may have entered Missouri between the mouths of the
Des Moines and Missouri Rivers, but the Chain of Rocks crossing near
St. Louis should not be ruled out. 16

It is doubtful that the concept of dual Osage migration routes will re¬
solve the inconsistencies of some villages on the Missouri and others far to
the south. However, maybe it will open a new line of investigation. Cer¬
tainly, it leaves us free to pinpoint the known Osage village and campsites
without further consideration of this inconsistency. For organizational rea¬
sons the sites will be presented by states, beginning with Missouri.

Villages and Camps in Missouri

H. R. Schoolcraft found three Osage winter hunt camps on Swan Creek in
northeastern Taney County, Missouri, which he visited in the winter of
1818. Although they were vacant, he estimated that each camp could have
accommodated about one hundred able-bodied males. Another Osage camp
was at the junction of Swan Creek and the White River. 17 No positive
identification exists of any permanent villages on or near the upper White
River. Certainly, such a village site must exist, and possibly more than one.
Clearly the Osages extensively used a well-established trail on the left bank
of the White River. They frequently used this route to reach Arkansas Post
throughout the Spanish period and slightly into the American period. As the
trail neared the mouth of the White River on the Mississippi, the Osages
would cross the narrow divide between the White River and the Arkansas
River, which placed them at the door of Arkansas Post (see Fig. 9).

A possibility has been suggested that as trade developed between the
Osages and Euro-Americans, the Osages could have moved outward from
the heartland of the Missouri Ozarks. 18 This would seem to produce some
sizable old villages between the heads of the Sac-Pomme de Terre-Niangua
Rivers and the head of Swan Creek. In the outward movement, one or two
bands should have moved lower down on the White River to be nearer to
Arkansas Post. Several villages have been found on the Pomme de Terre and
Niangua. Yet, every indication suggests these sites predate contact with the
white man.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

46 / Osage Empire

Fig. 9. Note the center cluster of villages with smaller clusters to the north and south.

It seems likely that the Big Osages crossed the Mississippi near Cape
St. Anthony, Missouri, and followed the Continental Trail (Virginia Warrior
Path) to the Ponime de Terre, Niangua, White River divide. They appar¬
ently established villages in this vicinity and northward along the Ponime
de Terre, Sac, and Niangua Rivers. The Osages called the Ponime de Terre,
Big Bone River, from which the name Big Osage is derived. In this way,
they would have had closer contact with the Little Osages, who with the
Missourias acted as a barrier between the Sac-Fox and the Big Osages. By
the time of Joliet and Marquette’s visit in 1673, the bulk of the Big Osages
were evidently on the lower Sac, Ponime de Terre, and Niangua Rivers and
along the Osage River between the Sac and Niangua Rivers. 19

Front a defensive viewpoint, this movement placed the Big Osages in a
position to observe the Sac and Fox yet still have the protection of the
Ozarks at their backs. However, some bands of Big Osages were still in
southwest Missouri and northwest Arkansas as late as 1775. Among these
were the Grosse Cote (Big Hill) and Black Dog bands, which moved to
Spring River near Baxter Springs, Kansas, between 1775 and 1777. 211 The
Little Osages were guardians of the “northern marches,” and the Arkansas
bands were the guardians of the “southern marches.”

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 47

We have verbal assurances that an important Osage village was located
in what is called Gladstone Cove on the Lake of the Ozarks. 21 Certainly,
the projectile points and scrapers found at this site seem to be Osage. This
site is about twelve miles northeast from the mouth of the Niangua River
between Laurie and Gravois Mills, Missouri. The village was possibly the
northeastern-most Big Osage village. For that reason and because of its lo¬
cation on the best Sac and Fox invasion route, this village would be vitally
important to the Osages. Quite probably, the chief of this village would be
a major chief.

Although no Osage village site has, to our knowledge, been reported
either on or below Rocky Ridge near the mouth of the Pomme de Terre
River, there had to be either a village or camp in this area. Albert Koch is
credited with finding large prehistoric bones at this site in 1840. 22 A report
from an Osage village near this site led him to the discovery. This would be
only a few miles below the present Pomme de Terre dam. 23 While over
twenty-five sites were found in a survey of the Pomme de Terre Valley before
the dam was built, only one shows evidence of being Osage. 24 Evidently,
traces of the Osage villages had either washed away or were buried in silt.
The Osages called the Pomme de Terre River by two names. One was Po¬
tato River, which would be pomme de terre in French, and the other was
an older name which translates to Big Bone River. It was this latter name
that led Albert Koch to his discovery in 1840. It is also the source of the
Big (Bone) Osage term that came from the Osage name for the river that
flowed past their village.

Three Osage village sites are given by John Swanton. 25 One was near the
mouth of the South Grand River. 26 In this vicinity, near Warsaw, Missouri,
the South Grand and Pomme de Terre join with the Osage River. As nearly
as the name given, Tanwakanwakaghe, can be deciphered, it would be, To
won Kon ka He (Go to Meet the Victors Town). Go to Meet the Victors is a
traditional womans name, but the clan cannot be identified with any cer¬
tainty.

The other two villages are at or near the junction of the Sac and Osage
Rivers. They might have been the same village, but one is given as being at
the mouth of the Sac River and the other was located near the mouth of
the river. Intapupshe or En Ta pu Pshe (Teach to Grind Corn with Stone)
was given as being above the mouth of the Sac River. Nikhdhitanwan or
Ne ka To (do) he To won (Good Man Town) was apparently at the mouth of
the Sac River. Good Man is a title of earned respect, so it gives no clue as
to a clan name. Evidently, the other Sac River village was noted for its corn
grinding facility, perhaps because of possible stone outcrops at this site.

Franquelins map of 1684 shows an Osage village at the mouth of the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

48 / Osage Empire

Osage River . 27 1 believe this would be a Little Osage village. If our concept
of dual Osage migration routes has any validity, it would be natural for the
Little Osages to arrive at the mouth of the Osage River via what was later
called the Sac and Fox War Trail or by following the Mississippi and Mis¬
souri to the mouth of the Osage River. The Sac-Fox War Trail ran from the
mouth of the Des Moines River near Keokuk, Iowa, to the mouth of the
Osage River. The terrain of this site would have better suited the Little
Osages than the Big Osages.

Pressure from the Sac and Fox probably forced a move from the exposed
mouth of the Osage River. Quite possibly the Sac and Fox were a motive
for the Kansas splinter leaving the Osages. Apparently, a large number of
Heart Stays Little Osages had established their village among the Missouria
in the Bend of the Missouri River. 28 It seems likely that the Osage River
Little Osages had included a sizable number of Kon za clan members. After
the splintering of the Kansas, the remaining Heart Stays, Tree Sitters, and
Down Under People of various clans would be forced to relocate because
they were not large enough to stand alone against the Sac and Fox. Evidence
shows the Little Osages composed of Heart Stays, Tree Sitters, and Down
Under People attached themselves to the Big Osages before 1800. 29

From the names and identifications given in the Spanish records, we
know the Little Osages of Van Meter State Park were Heart Stays People,
Cahokian, and Kaskaskian. 3 " After they moved from Saline County, around
1777, they and about half of the Missourias (80-100) divided into three
bands and lived for a time at present-day Jefferson City before they settled
on the Neosho in Kansas, which was before 1785. 31 After Fort Osage was
opened, one or more bands would live near the fort for a year or two at
a time.

The Down Under Little Osages with the Heart Stays and Tree Sitters had
also formed into three bands by 1777. These three bands came to be con¬
sidered as a part of what was called the White Hair bands by 1800. Jesuits
at Osage Mission distinguished between the two Little Osage groups by
calling three of the bands White Hair Little Osages and the remaining three
bands Little Osages. 32

At the heart of the Osage empire were the Vernon County, Missouri,
villages. Apparently, there were at least four Osage villages clustered around
the junction of the Marmaton, Little Osage, and Osage Rivers. 33 One of the
villages was located on the left side of the Little Osage River opposite the
mouth of the Marmaton. This was the site occupied by the White Hair
Little Osages, although there may have been one or two others that stood
on the flood plain. The known village was a large village covering about
thirty acres.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 49

The other three known village sites seem to have been Big Osage sites.
One of these was located on the right side of the Marmaton about five
miles above its mouth. It was about fifteen acres in extent. Another site was
the well-known Halley’s Bluff site on the right side of the Osage River and
about two miles below the junction of the Osage and Little Osage Rivers.
By tradition, this was the village of White Hair I. Approximately three
miles south of White Hair’s village was another village which covered
about thirty acres. 34

A feature of these villages is that they were all above the flood plain. The
same is true of the Saline County Little Osage site. While such locations
are to be expected of the Big Osages and possibly the Down Under Little
Osages, the Saline County Little Osage (Heart Stays) village represents a
departure from custom. Possibly the need to defend against the Sac and Fox
overrode the Heart Stays, Little Osage custom of building villages on the
first river terrace. This may also explain why only one Little Osage village
site, the Van Meter Park site, was found in the Bend of the Missouri, because
traces of others were washed away from the terrace. This same situation
could explain why only one Little Osage village has been found in Vernon
County. There should have been three sizable Little Osage villages in the
Vernon County area.

Villages in Kansas
Black Dog’s Band

Osage villages were clustered along the Neosho-Grand and Verdigris in
Kansas from 1785 to 1870. Another cluster was on the lower Neosho-Grand
and Verdigris in the early part of this period, but since these were in Okla¬
homa they will be discussed later. Semipermanent camps extended as far
west as Wichita, Kansas, and tepee camps as far as the Front Range in Colo¬
rado. Since the latter camps left no trace, we cannot give their locations.

As near as can be determined, the three Little Osage bands and the Big
Osage Black Dog Band settled in Kansas about the same time. It is likely
that the Black Dog band under the leadership of Black Dog’s father located
near Baxter Springs, Kansas, as early as 1775 but no later than 1795. The
Black Dog Museum places the completion of the Black Dog Trail between
Baxter Springs and the Salt Plains as being in 1803. Eighteen hundred would
be a more accurate date. Black Dog I was between 67 and 70 years old when
he died in 1848. This would place his birth between 1778 and 1781. He was
sixteen years old when he became band chief, which would place the date
between 1794 and 1797. Since his father moved to Baxter Springs at least
two years before his death, this would place the location in Kansas at 1792
or 1795. Allowing for adjustments in the Gregorian calendar, the date could

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

50 / Osage Empire

not have been later than 1794. This is not an unreasonable date since the
Little Osages were on the Neosho by 1785. 35

Black Dog’s village at Baxter Springs was well located. By following
Spring River to its headwaters, a link-up with both the Continental Trail
and the north-south Osage Trace could be made. This trace connected
the White Hair bands with the Claremore bands and continued southward
to the Red River and Natchitoches. The trace later became famous as
the Sedalia-Baxter Springs Cattle Trail (sometimes called the Shawnee
Trail). This Osage Trace was the south half of the military road connecting
Ft. Leavenworth with Ft. Gibson and Ft. Smith. The trace continuation
south from Ft. Smith was part of the Butterfield stage route. All permanent
Osage villages were on the Arkansas River drainage system after 1825 and
remain so today.

Intruders

After 1808, an increasing number of Euro-Americans came into contact
with the Osages in Missouri. The strain of trying to shun these contacts and,
thus, avoid open warfare, greatly affected the Osages. The Osages considered
Euro-Americans to be rude in manners and offensive in odor. In all fairness
it should be said that the intruders were, in many respects, outcasts of their
own culture and were not noted for cleanliness or manners. Greed for land
and personal possessions was not a new experience for the Osages, but they
had never seen it practiced on such a large scale before 1810. The Euro-
Americans’ seeming lack of respect for each other in speech and action
shocked the Osage sense of order and caring for each other. American fron¬
tier settlers have been described as “keeping the Sabbath and everything
else they could get their hands on.” Being unfamiliar with the “claims
game,” the Osages, until 1865, filed no claims for the theft of such Osage
property as game, furs, hides, livestock, and the plundering of their burials.
Yet, innumerable exaggerated claims were filed against the Osages, and most
of these unfounded claims were paid by treaty provisions. Only rigid re¬
straint by the Little Old Men and the band chiefs prevented an all-out war
against the intruders.

Under this turmoil and suppression of anger, many individuals and bands,
after 1808, began a movement from Missouri. Some moved to Kansas be¬
tween 1808 and 1820, but many more joined the Claremore bands in Okla¬
homa in this period. Very few of the White Hair bands remained in Vernon
County, Missouri, after White Hair I died. Between 1820 and 1825 a mas¬
sive migration from Vernon County to Neosho County, Kansas, took place.
In the fall of 1822 (and before the Treaty of 1825), White Hair II led what
was left of his Vernon County bands out on the Plains to hunt buffalo. They

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 51

never again returned to Missouri to live but instead built new villages on
the Neosho-Grand.

The abrasion of intruders upon the Osages caused them to accept a buffet-
zone between themselves and the intruding settlers. The Treaty of 1825 pro¬
vided a strip twenty-five miles wide east/west and fifty miles long north/
south between the Osage villages and the west boundary of Missouri. This
strip was called the Osage Neutral Lands until it was given to the Chero-
kees, and then it was called the Cherokee Neutral Lands. The buffer zone
experiment was possibly the first and only time the idea was tried in Euro-
American and Indian relationships. It never worked because intruders settled
on the Neutral Lands illegally, and the United States made no effort to
enforce the treaty agreement.

White Hair III

White Hair III divided his time between those of his people in Vernon
County and those on the Neosho. We have ample evidence to show that the
bulk of White Hair’s people had left Vernon County by 1822, although
White Hair himself moved in that year. W W Graves quotes from the Har¬
mony Mission Journal for September 5, 1822 36 : “The most of White Hair’s
people have gone on their fall hunt. It is understood that they do not intend
to return to their late residence but to establish themselves sixty or seventy
miles from this station.” On September 26,1822 the Union Mission Journal
reported, “Mr. August P. Chouteau with a party of Indians from White
Hair’s village called here. A boat of his had arrived at the mouth of Grand
River [Neosho-Grand] with goods to trade with the Indians. He intends to
form an establishment on this river above this place and states that White
Hair’s people have left their town with the intention of moving to this
river.” 37 Then on October 17,1822, the Union Mission Journal stated, “Last
evening arrived a company of White Hair’s Indians. This is the first visit
from that part of the nation. It appears that they are in an unsettled state and
have not selected a place for their new home.” 38

Black Dog II

Over four-hundred members of the Black Dog band were the first Big
Osages to settle on the drainage of the Neosho-Grand in Kansas. In the fall
of 1803, the Black Dog band joined with the Claremore bands and left Kan¬
sas. 39 However, they returned to Kansas in 1826 and stayed in Kansas until
all the Osages left in 1870.

Although his second Kansas village was about five miles below the Vil¬
lage of the Pipe, south of Oswego, Black Dog I died while visiting at his
old Big Cedar village in present-day Claremore, Oklahoma. Leadership of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

52 / Osage Empire

his band was disputed after his death. Black Dog II was slow to assert his
right to the chieftainship, and the result was that his band was split into
two factions. One faction followed Black Dog II, and the other followed
Wolf, a Cherokee member of the band. After his fathers death, Black Dog
II moved his village to Pumpkin Creek on the Verdigris. Wolf led his part
of the Black Dog band to live with the Cherokees. But, in order to draw
Osage annuities, which the government refused to pay his band as long as
they lived with the Cherokee, Wolf returned to Kansas and settled on the
Verdigris.

Little Osages-Little Bear

On the Neosho-Grand, the Little Osages and the White Hair bands built
villages from Owl Creek on the north to below Labette Creek on the south.
The Little Osage villages at the north limits of the reservation were prob¬
ably the oldest of these villages. Little Bear’s Little Osages settled near the
mouth of Owl Creek in Allen County, Kansas, in about 1823. Earlier the
Little Osages had lived near the Burlington Crossing in Coffey County,
Kansas, having settled there prior to 1785. After the Treaty of 1825, Little
Bear had to move south from Owl Creek because it was in the Sac and Fox
reservation.

Little Bear was head chief of the three Little Osage bands during the
1820s and until his death in 1868. The other two bands were led by Nishu-
mani or Ne shu Moie (Traveling Rain) and Numpevale or No pa Walla
(Thunder Fear). Little Bear was a member of the Hun ka (Earth) Night
People clan, while Traveling Rain and Thunder Fear were from the Tsi ha
she (Those Who Were Last to Come) Men of Mystery clan. Around 1828,
Little Bear’s village was located where Chanute, Kansas, now stands. At this
same time, Traveling Rain and Thunder Fear had their villages about five
miles downstream from Chanute near the mouth of Big Creek. 4 "

As more and more intruders settled illegally in the Osage nation, Little
Bear led the Little Osages to the area around Thayer, Kansas. 41 These were
the last Little Osage villages in Neosho County and on the Neosho-Grand
watershed. By 1865, they had relocated their villages in Wilson County,
Kansas, west of Thayer. These villages were on the north fork of Chetopa
Creek, which is in the Verdigris drainage system. After the Treaty of 1865
(Canville Treaty), Little Bear again moved his people, and two of the bands
settled near the mouth of Chetopa Creek on the Verdigris. Chetopa, who
had replaced one of the other band chiefs, settled in the north vee between
the Verdigris and Chetopa Creek. The other band settled in the south vee
opposite the Chetopa band. Little Bear built his last village near the old
Pawnee Fort at the junction of Fall River and the Verdigris. This village was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 53

very close to present-day Neodesha in Wilson County, Kansas. These were
the last homes the Little Osages had in Kansas.

For the sake of accuracy, we want to mention that, although his descen¬
dants use the Little Bear name as a surname, Little Bear is a convenience
interpretation. Little Bear would be Wa Shin ka in Osage, but this is usually
given as Wa Sop py Shin ka (Little Black Bear). The Jesuits rarely used the
Little Bear convenience. They spelled his name in such ways as Mintson
Shinka, Mitsoshinka, Miciao-shinka, and Micio-Shinca. These spellings
translate as Me tso Shin ka or Little Grizzly Bear, which was his correct
name as a member of the Night People clan.

White Hair Chiefs

A great deal of confusion exists about the White Hair line of succession.
While tracing the White Hair line of Tsi shu chiefs is not too difficult,
tracing the descent of Hun ka chiefs is difficult. In May of 1794, the Spanish
gave White Hair I a small medal and called him a counselor. 42 Since Gra
Moie or Arrow Going Home (Claremore I) died late in 1794 or early in
1795, he was alive when this happened. Yet the Spanish records note that
White Hair I had replaced Town Maker (Claremore II) in 1796. 43 This
clearly establishes Claremore Is death as sometime between May of 1794
and 1796. It is also clear that White Hair I was established as Grand Tsi shu
Chief by 1796. Pike’s date of 1800 is an estimate, while the Spanish records
were on-site observations and should take precedence over Pike’s date. Pike’s
account is the one most commonly used, however. The six-year difference
in dates has led to incorrect conclusions as to why White Hair I was chosen
over Claremore II, which will be dealt with later.

We also have some indication that White Hair I was the son of the Grand
Tsi shu Chief who preceded Claremore I. This same source gives the un¬
likely information that White Hair I was uncle to Claremore I. 44 This rela¬
tionship would have to be in European kinship terms. An Osage uncle was
the mother’s brother; the father’s brother was called father, not uncle. If
White Hair I was Claremore Is Osage uncle, he would have been from
some clan other than the Tsi shu Peacemaker clan and could not have been
a Grand Tsi shu Chief. Since White Hair I was clearly younger than Clare¬
more I, plainly he was not likely to be brother to Claremore Is father. It is
probable that White Hair I was uncle to Claremore II (in European terms)
and brother to Claremore I. The difference between Osage kinship terms
and European kinship terms could easily confuse Euro-American recorders.

Conflicting stories about the White Hair name is also evident. Francis
La Flesche gives White Hair as a personal name that refers to the sacred
white buffalo. 45 Another story relates that White Hair I led an Osage war

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

54 / Osage Empire

party to aid the Illinois Indians in the battle against General Arthur St. Clair.
This battle was fought on the Wabash River, November 4, 1791, and it was
the worst defeat the Americans ever suffered at the hands of Indians. More
than nine hundred Americans were killed and wounded. White Hair I, in
trying to take a scalp, ended up with a “scratch” (white wigs worn by the
soldiers of the time). He often wore the “scratch” and took the valor name
of White Hair. We believe both stories are true because it suited White
Hair’s purposes to take a valor name that was also a traditional name. Inci¬
dentally, White Hair Is original, traditional name was Gra to Moll se (Iron
Hawk).

White Hair Is oldest daughter, Pahushan, married Noel Mogray (Mon¬
grain) who was half Osage and half French. 4< ’ Jean Baptiste Mogray, an
older son of this marriage, became a major chief in the White Hair bands.
White Hair I died in 1808 and was buried near his village in Missouri. At
this time, George White Hair could not have been more than four or five
years old since his burial record gives his age as about forty-eight years in
January of 1852. A footnote in Tixier’s Travels on the Osage Prairies casts some
light on the question of White Hair descent. 47 As the editor points out,
Pike’s report indicates White Hair I had a grown son in 1806. This grown
son became White Hair II, but he was such a bad chief that the Council
of Ah ki ta replaced him with White Hair III, who was George White
Hair’s father. Houck claims White Hair I died in 1808. Bradbury in his
Travels states White Hair was six years old in 1811. Lastly, De Mun’s Jour¬
nal claims White Hair was a grown man in 1816. To add our own com¬
ment, it is difficult to reconcile Iron Hawk (White Hair IV) as cousin to
George White Hair without an adult White Hair between White Hair I
and George White Hair. Thus, the White Hair descent would run from
White Hair I to White Hair II to White Hair III to George White Hair IV
and then to Iron Hawk. As subsequent events indicate, this was the likely
line of succession. It seems that it was White Hair III who led the Vernon
County, Missouri, bands to the Neosho River in 1822.

George White Hair became White Hair IV in 1833 upon the death of
his father White Hair III and moved his village downstream from where his
father had located. This move also indicates that George’s father was indeed
White Hair III. It is possible that Fr. Bax erred in estimating George White
Hair’s death age as forty-eight years in 1852 and that Bradberry could have
underestimated George White Hair’s age as six in 1811. However, a two
or three year difference is not a serious error in estimating age; it is near
enough to be almost conclusive. It seems quite clear that George White
Hair was fourth in the line. It is likely that White Hair III was also called
George Whitehair.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 55

George died without a son of his own blood although he had an adopted
son who was a minor when George died. White Hair III, George, had
two brothers, although neither was immediately acceptable as Chief. These
brothers were Tcio cio anca or Tsi shu Wa ti an ka (Saucy Tsi shu) and Little
White Hair. 48 Saucy Tsi situ was chief of Elktown (at the junction of the
Elk and Verdigris Rivers) but he was passed over by the Council of Ah
ke tas, possibly because he was allied with the Claremore bands or, as Fitz¬
gerald states, “because he was wild and mischievous.” Little White Hair was,
in 1852, chief of Littletown (Oswego, Kansas; however, he was later chief of
the Village of the Pipe) but since he was in poor health, he was passed over.

George White Hair’s cousin, Gratamantze or Gra to Moh se (Iron Hawk)
was selected as the fifth White Hair Chief. 49 It should be explained that
“cousin,” as used here, is a European term. The Osages had no cousin term;
in Osage relationships, Iron Hawk was brother to George White Hair. That
is, he was the son of George’s father’s brother. Iron Hawk died of scurvy on
March 12, 1861, at the age of 48.

Little White Hair replaced Iron Hawk as Grand Tsi shu Chief and thus
became the sixth White Hair Chief. He was also the last hereditary White
Hair Chief. Upon his death on December 24,1869, Isaac Gibson, the Osage
Agent, appointed Wa tse Ki he ka (Star Chief) as Governor of all the Osages
and, thus, brought an end to the ages-old practice of selecting Division
Chiefs. Star Chief is better known by such names as Joe Pawnee No Pa she
(Not Afraid of the Pawnee), Governor Joe, and Big Hill Joe. Star Chief was
the last hereditary Grand Hun ka Chief.

Grand Hun ka Chiefs

As near as we can trace the descent of the Grand Hun ka Chiefs, it appears
to be as we have outlined in the following paragraphs. Jean Lafon was men¬
tioned in Spanish records in 1786 and again in 1794 when he was killed
returning from New Orleans. 50 While his French name was sometimes
translated as The Fool, we think a more accurate interpretation would be
The Farther End. This in turn easily translates to Ko she Se gra or Tracks Far
Away. The Spanish mention that Claremore I and Lafon were the two main
chiefs. Since Tracks Far Away is a Ponca Peacemaker name and Claremore I
was the Grand Tsi shu Chief, apparently Jean Lafon was the Grand Hun ka
Chief.

Both Claremore I and Jean Lafon were opposed to the presentation of a
small medal to Grande Piste (Big Track). Big Track’s name was also Tracks
Far Away and he was apparently son to Jean Lafon. His father would defi¬
nitely be opposed to his son leading the Big Hills to the Arkansas and any
medal that recognized his leadership of the splinter bands. Yet, after the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

56 / Osage Empire

death of Jean Lafon, clearly Cashesegra (the Spanish spelling) did become
Grand Hun ka Chief and thus placed the Grand Division Chiefs in different
villages, the very thing his father had tried to prevent.

It appears that Tracks Far Away II was probably followed by another of
the same name who was commonly called Mad Buffalo (the Cherokee
called him Skiatook). The U.S. government imprisoned him, and as a con¬
sequence another Grand Hun ka Chief was chosen. Pawnee No Pa she I (Not
Afraid of the Pawnee is a valor name; his real name was Star Chief) was the
fourth Hun ka chief, starting with Jean Lafon. On Joseph Pawnee No Pa she's
(Star Chief II) baptism record this was also the name given for his father,
and his mothers name was given as Waco Ki he ka (Woman Chief). 31 We
cannot determine if Pawnee No Pa she I was the son of Tracks Far Away II
or Mad Buffalo. However, since Joe Pawnee No Pa she was eleven years old
when he was baptized on November i, 1848, his father would have been a
very young adult when Tracks Far Away II died, so it would seem that he
would be Mad Buffalos son. It would seem Joe’s father was fifth in the his¬
toric line of Grand Hun ka Chiefs and Joe himself would have been the
sixth.

We must mention one other background. From about 1850 to 1897, a
sizable band of Quapaw lived near the Osages. The bulk of these lived in a
village between the mouths of Labette and Cherry Creeks. All the rest
lived in Beavers Town. 32 In the 1850s, some Quapaws lived on the Cana¬
dian River of Oklahoma. The remainder lived in the Neutral Lands or with
the Osages. During the Osage allotment process in 1906, a few Quapaw
were given lands in the southeast corner of the Osage reservation. Others
were forced to their own reservation in Ottawa County, Oklahoma, by the
United States government. This action was a prelude to forcing the Osages
to allot their lands in 1897. However, Osage resistance to these efforts by
the United States government delayed the allotment of their lands until
1906-1907.

White Hair Villages

Records are often confusing in their references to White Hair villages along
the Neosho-Grand in Kansas (see Fig. 10). While there might have been
other reasons for the confusion, two factors were reasons enough to cause a
great deal of confusion. First, one must bear in mind that villages were
abandoned and new ones built because of changing conditions, such as sani¬
tation and the need for firewood. Second, there were four different White
Hair Chiefs that served between 1822 and 1869. We will try to locate and
date the various White Hair Villages in this time span.

White Hair II established his village on the Neosho-Grand in 1822.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

58 / Osage Empire

W W Graves locates this first White Hair Village as being in Section 16,
Township 28, Range 19, or across the Neosho west of Shaw, Kansas. Since
White Hair II died here in 1833, this was White Hair’s Town from 1822
to 1833. George White Hair was third in the line. Graves positions his
town in Section 2, Township 29, Range 19 or across the Neosho opposite
Boudinot Mission, which was near the mouth of Four Mile Creek. 53 This
would be on the right side of the Neosho on Ogeese Creek about six miles
down river from the first White Hair Village. The first village site was es¬
tablished about 1822 and the second site existed by 1830 when Boudinot
mission was built. This second site was George White Hair’s Village of resi¬
dence until his death; he was buried January 24, 1852, at about 48 years of
age. 54 The village was inhabited until 1865, but it was White Hair’s place of
residence only between 1833 and 1852. Fr. Ponziglione describes George
White Hair’s house as a double cabin near a large saw and grist mill. 55 The
Osages burned the house and mill probably because of their dislike for
these symbols of Euro-American life. Fr. Ponziglione says they were burned
because they did not pay their expenses. Articles 2,4, and 10 of the Treaty
of 1825 provided for the construction and operation of White Hair’s cabin
and mill.

This White Hair village had several names. It has been called Nion-
Chou Town or Neosho Town. Another name which is sometimes used in
early accounts is Manrinhabotso or Mo he Ah Gra (Reaches the Sky). This
name refers to the wind reaching the sky and it is a traditional name of the
Isolated Earth clan. 36 White Hair Is grandson,Jean Baptiste Mogray (Mon¬
grain), was chief of this village, but because George White Hair resided
there it was also known as White Hair’s Town. The village was the center
of the United States government’s activities. In addition, it had a trading
post owned by the Chouteau’s Western Division of the American Fur Com¬
pany. 57 Melicour Papin was the agent for his Chouteau cousins. In later years
this post was moved to the Heart Stays village (Little Town), which was
sometimes called Papin’s Town because the trading post was relocated there.

The selection of Iron Hawk shifted the White Hair chieftainship to an¬
other village. This village was often called Little Town and it stood very
near the present site of Oswego, Kansas. We identify this as Iron Hawk’s
town because of baptism records and a description by A. T. Andreas. 58 Con¬
fusion arises because the Jesuits used two Little Town names. However, they
sometimes distinguished between the two by calling one the Little Town
Below and the other Little Town. The Jesuits often called the Oswego vil¬
lage, Nantze Waspe or No tse Wa spe (literally Quiet Heart, freely translated
as Heart Stays). John Mathews established a trading post near this village.
Since this village was also called Papin’s Town, it is possible that Mathews

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 59

bought the post from the Chouteau owners. White Hair IV (Iron Hawk)
was a White Hair Little Osage and became Grand Tsi shu Chief early in
1853. Thus, Little Town was White Hairs Village from 1853 to March 12,
1861, when Iron Hawk died.

Little White Hair became Grand Tsi shu Chief upon the death of Iron
Hawk. His Osage name was given by Fr. Ponziglione as Owassoppe or Wa
Sop pe (Black Bear). 59 At first glance, this may seem to be a name of the Bear
or Night people clans, but in fact, it was a traditional name of the Tsi shu
Peacemaker clan. Tixier wrote in 1839-1840 that the chief of Naniompa
or No ne O pa (Pipe) was Old White Hair, uncle of the present chief. 60
Yet, Fitzgerald states that Little White Hair was chief of Little Town and
brother to George White Hair. 61 There appear to be two conflicts in these
sources, one of relationship and one of villages. “The present chief” in
1839-1840 was George White Hair and the uncle term had to be an error
of misunderstood relationship. A similar mix-up existed between the two
brothers, Gra Moie (Claremore I) and his only brother White Hair I. The
only way “old White Hair” could have the White Hair name and be uncle
to George White Hair was to be a brother of Claremore I and White Hair
I. There is no record of such a brother; even if a third brother did exist, he
would have been some years older than the life expectancy of an Osage
male, which in 1839 was about fifty years. Claremore I and White Hair I
had no known brothers, but their oldest sister married White Plume, the
well-known Kansas (Kaw) Chief. Another sister married an Osage, but
nothing more is known of this sister or her descendants.

While Fitzgerald is apparently correct in calling Little White Hair a
brother of George White Hair, Tixier seems to be correct in placing him as
chief of the Village of the Pipe. We believe Fitzgerald was referring to the
Little Town Below, which was also the Village of the Pipe. It is possible that
before this time (1839-1840) Little White Hair was chief of Little Town
(Little Town does not refer to the size of the town but to the fact that it was
a Little Osage village). Another possibility was the nearness of the Village
of the Pipe to Little Town. The Village of the Pipe was only five miles
downstream from Little Town; this is why the Jesuits called it the Little
Town Below. The Quapaw village was across the Neosho on the left bank
and the Village of the Pipe was on the right bank. Five and one-half miles
downstream from the Village of the Pipe, and also on the right bank, was
the village of Black Dog I. White Hair V occupied the Village of the Pipe
until 1865. He then moved to the Verdigris in Montgomery County, Kansas,
where he died in 1869. Thus, from 1861 to 1865 the Village of the Pipe was
White Hairs Town.

The pipe material found at this village needs discussion at this point. To

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

60 / Osage Empire

call the pipes made of this material a calumet pipe is an abuse of Osage
custom. All Osage calumet (peace and friendship) pipes were made of cat-
linite, which is red. The red of the sunrise was the symbol of life. Sop pe or
dark is often interpreted as black, but it means any dark shade or color. This
black or dark pipe material is symbolic of war, death, night, and the un¬
known. Thus, pipes made of this dark pipestone had a different use than as a
calumet, although pipes of this material may be given as a gesture of friend¬
ship to a bereaved friend.

There were many Osage villages visited by the Jesuits, as shown in the
Osage Mission Records. 62 Most of these were called by the chief’s name at
the time of the entry into the records and any given village possibly had
two or more chiefs between 1847 and 1865. Thus, it may appear that more
villages existed than is justified by the actual number of Osage villages on
the Neosho-Grand in Kansas. Since locating these villages accurately is vir¬
tually impossible, the locations given are only approximate and errors are
very probable.

We know from the Jesuit records that Owl’s Village was located on Big
Creek, probably near the mouth. This village was composed of White Hair
Little Osages. It seemingly went out of existence around 1850. However,
Owl could have died and been replaced by Wa she Pe she (Bad Temper) of
the Winds clan. This chief was also called Bad Bird. Owl (Wa po ka) was
spelled Woipoka and Oipoka by the Jesuits.

Two villages were located close to the Mission (today’s St. Paul, Kansas).
These were Little Town Over the River which was also called Little August
(Ogeese Capitaine) Village and Over the River. This town was three miles
southwest of the Mission and across the Neosho (west side). The second
nearby village was Briar’s Town. This village was probably on Flat Rock
Creek two or three miles northeast of the mission. Briar’s Town had many
names: Tzewha-changi, Beaver’s Town, Mill’s Town, Inshapiungri, Cuci-
ci-nica’s band, and Wochaka Ougrin.

Claremore Villages

Black Dog Is village has already been given as being five and one-half
miles downstream from the Village of the Pipe and on the same side of the
Neosho. It would seem that confusion about Belle Oiseau or Pretty Bird is
rivaled only by the White Hair confusion. 63 Tixier mentions this village as
belonging to Belle Oiseau or Shinkawassa. Pretty Bird is Wa shin Log ny in
the Osage language. Wa shin and sometimes Wa Shin ka mean bird; Log ny
means good, handsome, or pretty. There is no way one can make “pretty”
out of Shin ka Was sa. Yet, this is close enough to Shin ka Wa sa (Dark Eagle)
so as to be a certainty. There is little doubt that Tixier, like many before and

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 61

after him, confused Pretty Bird (Belle Oiseau in French) with Black Dog,
whose traditional name was Dark Eagle. This name belongs to the Mottled
Eagle clan. Anyone who speaks Osage could easily verify these names. Tally
and Pretty Bird often represented Black Dog because they were his best
friends. Tixier undoubtedly met Pretty Bird and mistook him for Black
Dog. From his description it is evident that he never met the seven-foot-tall
Black Dog.

Between 1865 and 1870, all the Osage villages were on the Verdigris in
Kansas. The Agency was relocated near the mouth of Drum Creek about
four miles downstream from Independence, Kansas. Two miles southwest of
the Agency was Governor Joe’s Village. About seven miles downstream, be¬
tween the Verdigris and Big Hill Creek was Tally’s Town (Black Dog’s band).
Two miles south on Claymore Creek stood Claremore’s Village. Wolf’s Vil¬
lage (also a Black Dog band) was two miles south of Claremore’s Village, on
Pumpkin Creek. Black Dog’s Town was on the west side of Onion Creek,
near its mouth, until Tally moved it to Big Hill Creek.

Claremore’s Town was called Townmaker’s Town, Grema’s Town, and
Gemond’s Town. To the Osages, the town was Pasuga or Pa slum O gre
(Those who Came to the Bend of the River), which the Jesuits spelled as
Passu Ougrin. This was the name of their old village west of Claremore,
Oklahoma, next to Claremore’s Mound.

Tally’s Town was also called Sanze Ougrin or Son tsa O gre (Those who
Came to the Upland Forest). Most of Claremore’s bands were Upland Forest
Big Hills while the White Hair Big Hills were Thorny Bush People. Black
Dog’s Town (Tally’s Town) was also called Passoni Tanwha by the Jesuits,
which translates to Pasona Town (Ho tse Tun ka or Big Cedar). Pasona was
Black Dog Is old Village at present-day Claremore, Oklahoma.

Hunting Camps in Kansas

As one would expect, there were many Osage buffalo hunting camps in
Kansas. It should be kept in mind that there were more en route camps than
actual hunting camps, that is, camps spaced a day’s journey apart between
the Vernon County, Missouri, Neosho-Grand and Verdigris villages and the
hunting grounds. When traveling to and from the buffalo hunts, it was cus¬
tomary to erect a camp on both sides of major stream crossings. The Osages
almost universally ended a day’s travel on a stream and on the side that was
in the direction of travel. Thus, a sudden flood in the night did not delay
their next day’s travel.

In identifying these buffalo hunting camps, we were forced to realize
that time was an important factor. Most of the Kansas camps were being
used by the Osages by 1750. The Oklahoma camps could not have been

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

62 / Osage Empire

used very extensively until after 1757, which was the year Ferdinandina fell
into Osage hands. Most of the Kansas camps were used heavily until i860.
The slavery controversy in Kansas interrupted their full use until 1865, but
the intruder problem still hampered a complete use of the camps. Removal
and the disappearance of the southern herd eventually halted Osage buffalo
hunts in Kansas.

A favored buffalo hunt camping area of the Little Bear and Nopawalla
bands of Little Osages was along the Little Arkansas from its mouth north¬
ward and west on the Arkansas. A major camp was near the Indian Cultural
Center at Wichita, Kansas. 64 The Osages had driven the Wichitas from this
area between 1720 and 1750. During the Civil War the Osages gave the
Wichita permission to stay here because they had asked for permission to
wait out the war here. Their need was great and they were an honorable
people so the Osages gave their consent.

Two Black Dog sites were at Oxford and Bluff City, Kansas. 65 The Ox¬
ford hunting camp was below the Ninnescah mouth and the other camp
was on Bluff Creek at Bluff City. After 1803, the Oxford camp was used
by the Little Osages. This was a very desirable site since it was at an excel¬
lent crossing on the Arkansas. Buffalo were plentiful in the area because of
lush, rich grass. In addition, they were attracted by the Salt Plains to the
southwest.

George Sibley visited two Osage buffalo camps in Kansas while on a
tour during August ol 1811. 66 He reported a Little Osage camp below the
forks of the Ninnescah in Sedgwick County, Kansas. Another camp, which
was used by the Big Osages, was near Caldwell, Kansas, on Bluff Creek. This
camp was probably used by White Hairs Big Osages, because Sibley places
the Claremore bands in an Oklahoma camp on the same tour in which he
mentions this camp being used by the Big Osages.

Several other Osage camps have been recorded. Without a doubt there
were Osage hunting camps in Barber County, Kansas. 67 Another reported
camp was about thirty miles west of Wichita. 68 This would place the hunt¬
ing camp on Smoots Creek on the upper Ninnescah in Evan township of
Kingman County, Kansas. En route camps were located on Grouse Creek
about two miles north of Dexter, Kansas. 69 This seems to be true in view
of the known en route camps given in the same source as being on Timber
Creek in present-day Winfield, Kansas. About fifteen or sixteen miles, the
distance between Dexter and Winfield, would be an easy day’s travel for a
Grand Hunting Party, which usually made fifteen to twenty miles a day
through the Osage Prairies and up to thirty miles a day on the Plains.

Quite probably the last Osage buffalo hunting camp in Kansas was about
eighteen miles southeast of Medicine Lodge, Kansas. Specifically, this was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 63

Section 36, Township 34, Range 10, of Barber County, Kansas. On or about
August 7, 1874 a band of Osages led by Big Wild Cat were camped near
Cedar Springs. There were twenty-nine men, women, and children in the
hunting party. A group of Indian haters from Medicine Lodge fell on this
band, killing four Osages and looting the camp. 7l) The Osages had reserved
the right to hunt in this area in the Removal Act of 1870 and had every
right under United States law to hunt in this area. The Governor of Kan¬
sas protected the murderers by mustering them into the militia and back¬
dating their papers. Evidently, the men had found times hard and needed an
excuse to draw militia pay. It is ironic that Big Wild Cat was one of the
scouts who made George A. Custers campaign against Black Kettle a suc¬
cess (Battle of the Washita, 1868). It was in the Washita campaign that Cus¬
ter became known as an Indian fighter.

This incident and the subsequent lack of justice was a major cause of
Osage discontent. Discontent, which had almost reached the point of re¬
taliation upon Medicine Lodge, led to placing the Osages under martial law.
This is the only time they were subjected to this indignity. Ultimately, as
an outgrowth of the Crime at Medicine Lodge, all Indians in Oklahoma
and Indian Territories were confined to their reservations to control the
growing discontent on the reservations. It was against this background that
the northern Cheyenne “jumped” their Oklahoma reservation and sub¬
jected Kansas to its last Indian war in 1875. The Medicine Lodge Indian
haters brought upon themselves and Kansas the “Indian Scare of 1875” by
their attack on peaceable Osage hunters.

Villages in Oklahoma

On the surface, it appears there were fewer villages of the Claremore bands
than there were of the White Hair bands. Nearly all the Claremore bands
were Big Osages but the White Hair bands included at least four Little
Osage villages. Clearly the Claremore bands had a majority of the Big
Osages. The apparent difference in the number of villages is not a good
measure of the number of people involved because the villages varied in
population. From the debatable population figures available, it seems evident
that each of the three largest Claremore villages were larger than any single
White Hair village. By weighing the available information, it would be rea¬
sonable to state that the size of the Claremore bands were about equal to or
slightly larger than the White Hair bands.

All the known Osage villages in Oklahoma prior to 1870 were lo¬
cated either on the Verdigris or the Neosho-Grand. In all but one or two
exceptions, the villages were between the two rivers, although they might
have been closer to one than the other. Black Dog’s band was somewhat of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

64 / Osage Empire

a “wild card.” That is, he joined the Claremore bands in 1803 and left
them in 1826 to settle twelve or thirteen miles downstream from Oswego,
Kansas. Thus, for a period of about seven years, 1826-1833, Black Dog
was not attached to either the Claremore bands or the White Hair bands.
Black Dogs independence indicates the probability that the Black Dog band
would have formed a fourth Osage group if the Euro-Americans had not
appeared on the scene. It was not that Black Dog felt a need to form an
independent group, but it was a natural drift toward independent status.

Black Dog rarely caught the attention of visitors because he tried to
avoid them. However, his good friends Tally and Pretty Bird frequently rep¬
resented him. For this reason, Euro-Americans often mistook Tally’s office
to be chief counselor to Claremore. In fact, Black Dog was chief counselor
to Claremore and Talley was chief counselor to Black Dog. While Black
Dog II was away during the slavery controversy, Tally acted as head chief of
the two Black Dog bands. 71

The earliest known Osage village in Oklahoma was at the Three Forks
(the junction of Neosho-Grand, Verdigris, and Arkansas) (see Fig. 11). This
was Tracks Far Away s (misinterpreted as Big Track) village, which was be¬
tween the Neosho-Grand and the Verdigris, opposite what was later Fort
Gibson. 72 The misinterpretation, Big Track, is the best known and most
widely used interpretation of Cashesegra. The phonics are so good, it is
difficult to understand how the name could be so badly misinterpreted.
Cashesegra is clearly Ka she Se gra which unmistakably translates to Tracks
Far Away. Equally clear, in the name alone, is that it refers to the genesis
myth of discovering the first buffalo.

This story relates that Little Brother traveled many valleys and discovered
the tracks of “big foot” (an Osage name for the buffalo). He hurried back
to the village to relate his news. The Elder Brothers could see from the grass
stains on his legs that he had traveled far and his manner showed he had
exciting news. When Little Brother told of finding these tracks far away, the
people decided to adopt Tracks Far Away as a personal name in honor of the
event. Thus, Tracks Far Away became a personal name of the Ponca Peace¬
maker clan. Possibly the Osage appellation of “Big Foot,” for buffalo tracks,
led to the interpretation of Big Track.

The significance of the role played by Tracks Far Away was lost because
of the misinterpretation. Tracks Far Away was the Grand Hun ka Chief,
which means that under Osage law he stood equal to Claremore I (Arrow
Going Home) and his successor White Hair I (Iron Hawk). It has been
claimed that Tracks Far Away usurped the authority of young Town Maker
(Claremore II). This could not be true, since Tracks Far Away was the Grand
Hun ka Chief who stood above any band chief. There were severe restric-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

hunting areas are indicated by camps leading from the main villages between the Verdigris and

66 / Osage Empire

tions on this supreme Grand Hun ka office, which precluded interference
with a band chief. Town Maker was a band chief with only the restriction
of the consent of his band on his actions. There can be no doubt that Tracks
Far Away had a considerable amount of influence on Town Maker, since he
was Town Makers uncle. In Osage relationships, the only uncles were the
mothers brothers; the oldest of these was the uncle. The uncle was respon¬
sible for his nephew’s education and training. Therefore, Tracks Far Away did
exert a considerable amount of influence over young Town Maker. Euro-
American observers, however, recorded what they thought they saw and did
not consider the complexities of Osage life.

The best-known Osage village in Oklahoma was Claremore’s Village.
This was near the Verdigris, between Claremore’s Mound and the river. It
was twenty-eight miles west of Union Mission and had a population of
three thousand living in about three hundred lodges (at about 1820). 73
Around this main village were several smaller villages. The Osages called
this village Pasona or Those Who Came to the Bend of the River. They also
called their later village in Kansas by the same name. Town Maker (Clare-
more II) died here in 1828. Claremore III (Town Maker II) son of Clare-
more II moved Pasona to Kansas in about 1833.

Another well-known Osage village in Oklahoma was the Crosse Cote
or Big Hill Town. 74 This village was located on the Verdigris in present-
day Nowata County, Oklahoma. It was probably about eight miles east of
Nowata, Oklahoma, on the right side of the Verdigris. The chief of this vil¬
lage in 1822 was Sing ah Moineh which seems to be Molt en ka Shin ka
(Little Clay). 73 This name is a reference to the mythological crayfish that
gave the Osages the four sacred colors of clay. The crayfish was the Little
Earth Maker and the elk was the Big Earth Maker. Little Clay and Little
Earth are names of the Elk and Crawfish clans.

As was explained above, Black Dog avoided greeting visitors. His village
was not as well known as Claremore’s Village or even the Big Hill Village.
Yet, it was a sizable village and had some features that illustrate the greatness
of Black Dog I. This village was at the site of the present Woodlawn Ceme¬
tery in Claremore, Oklahoma. 76 Both this village and the later two Kansas
villages were all called Pasuga or Big Cedar. Black Dog had three great
engineering feats among his achievements: (1) constructing the Black Dog
Trail, the first improved road in Kansas and Oklahoma; (2) constructing a
well-planned racecourse at Claremore; (3) constructing a concealed cave at
Claremore which could hold a year’s supply of food and all of the almost
five hundred people in his band.

It was this cave that spared the Black Dog band from the cruel calamity
that fell upon the Claremore band at Pasona. In the fall of 1817, a force com-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 67

posed of Cherokees, Delawares, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Koasati, Tonkawa,
Comanche, and white men, which totaled nearly six hundred men—three
times larger than the total of old men, sick persons, and young children in
the village—struck Claremore’s village. They judiciously selected a time
when all the able-bodied adults were away on the Plains hunting buffalo.
With only the old, ill, and very young to oppose them, it is not surprising
that this “brave” force was able to slaughter or capture most of the Osages
in the Claremore band in this atrocity that is often presented as the “Battle
of Claremore’s Mound.”

Seeing the smoke and hearing the sounds of this “battle,” the Black Dog
people hid in the cave. When the victorious force sought to slaughter the
residents of Pasuga, they found no prey. Although they looted and burned
the village in their rampage, not one life was lost nor were any children
taken. Black Dog’s foresight had saved his people; thus, they were available
to feed and aid the few survivors of Pasona. When the Osages retaliated for
this assault on their helpless ones, the United States government supported
the Cherokee because they viewed them as “civilized” and the Osages as
wild, trouble-making buffalo Indians.

Black Dogs achievements were not limited to engineering. Among the
various Osage bands, none emerged from the severe epidemics as well as
Black Dog’s people. He did not know what caused the people to sicken, nor
did he know how to cure the stricken. However, he did know that isolation
on the High Plains lessened the strength of the epidemic. At the first sign
of an outbreak, Black Dog led his people out onto the Plains. Medieval
Europeans could not conceive of a better way to cope with this problem,
and they had a great deal more experience with it. Black Dog died while
visiting his old village site at Claremore on March 24, 1848, twenty-two
years after he had moved back to Kansas. He was buried in the cave he had
engineered so many years before. With both Claremore and Black Dog
among the Arkansas bands, these bands had two of the strongest leaders that
existed among the Osages.

Aside from Black Dog’s village there were also two small church-related
villages. There were two branch missions called Hopefield in Oklahoma and
one in Kansas. These missions did not exist in the same time span. Hopefield
number one was on the west side of the Neosho-Grand about five miles
upstream from Union Mission. An Osage village headed by Monepasha or
Moll ne Pa she (Not Afraid of the Gopher) was at this site. 77 (The Osages,
generally, greatly feared the pocket gopher because they believed it was ca¬
pable of great harm. The root words, Molt and Ne ka or earth man, possibly
have some connection with this belief. However, this appears to be a valor
name instead of a traditional name.) This band was not among the original

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

68 / Osage Empire

Claremore bands. They came from the White Hair bands when Hopefield
number one was founded in 1823.

A second Hopefield mission was established on the Neosho-Grand. Along
with the establishment of this branch mission came a small band of full-
bloods and mixed-bloods. This village was also on the west side of the river
near Cabin Creek about four miles upstream from the Chouteau-Revoir
(Revard) post on the Saline. 78 Apparently, these were also White Hair people
and some mixed-bloods who lived with them. Given time, it is possible
that these Osages would have become farmers. The three Hopefield Mis¬
sions were the most successful farming missions ever established among the
Osages.

Camps in Oklahoma

As in Kansas, the Osage buffalo camps in Oklahoma far exceeded the num¬
ber of villages. We do not pretend that the camps described below are in
any way a complete catalog of camps. However, the campsites given do al¬
low some idea of the length and breadth of the Osage buffalo hunting
range. They also indicate, to some extent, routes to these hunting grounds.

One of the southern camps was located in Pontotoc County, Okla¬
homa. 79 This camp was in the northeast corner of the county on the south
side of the Canadian River. It was located about fifteen miles south and
slightly west of Holdenville, Oklahoma. A monument at Mates Springs west
of Allen, Oklahoma, on Highway 12 marks the site. This camp was used by
both the Claremore bands and Black Dog in the 1830s.

Another camp was reported in 1819. 8U This was an en route camp located
across the Arkansas opposite Sand Springs, which is in the Tulsa, Oklahoma,
area. It is a point of interest that near this same site Fort Arbuckle was es¬
tablished, to cover the heavily used Osage buffalo trails that passed along the
north and east side of the Arkansas in this area. From this point, it followed
the Arkansas to the mouth of the Cimarron. Lt. Wilkinson, while returning
from an exploration of the Osage hunting areas in Kansas in 1806, found
Tracks Far Away (Big Track) in a camp between Tulsa and the mouth of the
Verdigris. 81 This en route camp was on the same trail.

In August of 1811, Major Sibley made a tour of the Osage hunting
grounds and visited a hunting camp of the Arkansas bands near Medford,
Oklahoma, on the Salt Fork. 82 He traveled from this camp, some thirty
miles west of the Salt Plains, to Salt Rock on the Cimarron in Woodward
County, Oklahoma, with a party of Osage hunters. From this account, it is
evident that Osage buffalo hunters often ranged great distances from their
hunting camps.

Albert Pike in 1832 reported finding the Claremore bands hunting on

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 69

the Washita in what is probably Grady County, Oklahoma, which was prob¬
ably as far southwest as the Osages established hunting camps. 83 There were
reportedly about thirty lodges in the camp, which would indicate a party
of more than five hundred people. This area was very close to Cheyenne
territory, if not actually in their country. However, a party of this size would
have little cause for alarm despite their nearness to the Cheyenne. It was
unlikely that the Cheyenne would attack a party this large but, certainly,
the hunters would need to be alert.

We have personal knowledge of three Black Dog en route camps. At one
site, the Joe Boulanger site, Black Dog’s marks are still on a large rock. The
hearts and horse pictographs were used to denote campsites on the Black
Dog trail (second Osage buffalo trail). This site is on the Caney River,
southwest of the old Joe Boulanger home and across the river from the old
Paul Herard home.

Another Black Dog campsite is one-half mile south of Elgin, Kansas, in
Osage County, Oklahoma, on the Caney River. This is the famous Gra to
Me Shin ka (Little Hawk Woman) site. The ancient elm trees which once
sheltered Black Dog’s people are still standing. For many years, it was a fa¬
vored picnic spot. We boys often swam in the Bass Hole, which was a deep
pool below the Black Dog Crossing.

A final en route camp in this general area was located on Pond Creek in
Osage County, Oklahoma. This Pond Creek was called Poor Pawnee Creek
by the old Osages, not the Pond Creek west of Ponca City, Oklahoma. Black
Dog’s camp was a half mile upstream from the Pond Creek bridge on High¬
way 99. This site was later, after 1870, the location of Strike Axe’s Little
Osage Village. It was also the site of the ration station for his band. We have
not located the Osage villages in Oklahoma after 1870 because they came
so late in time.

TRAILS

Many trails used by the Osages were ancient before the Osages used them.
Without a doubt, Indian feet walked upon them before the time of Christ.
A few may have even been used over three thousand years ago. Of course,
the Osages opened new trails as the need arose. One feature stands out in
the network of Osage trails—there were more east-west trails in use at any
given time than there were trails that ran north and south. That is, at any
given point in time, more east-west routes were being used than north-
south routes. This pattern in the network of transportation still prevails in
the United States today. One can only conclude there was a greater east-
west movement than north and south movement.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

70 / Osage Empire

We do not wish to over theorize, but in view of this prevailing move¬
ment of Indian peoples east and west, as their trails bear witness, there is a
well-established pattern. Frontier historians stress the westward movement
of the Euro-American people. Geographers note the east-west dominance
in transportation, and geopoliticians note the westward orientation of the
American nation. Since each offers theories for this phenomenon, there can
be no harm in suggesting another. This pattern was not created on this con¬
tinent by Euro-Americans. Euro-Americans merely followed the pattern
already established by Indians. The American Indians had created it long
before Europeans appeared in America. Such patterns across continents are
created by continental cultures. Coastal cultures, such as those of Europe, are
characterized by inland routes from the seas and waterways. Typically these
are short routes that favor no particular direction. This is the pattern that
was followed in the early settlement of the Atlantic Tidewater region.

These Osage trails show another pattern that Euro-Americans often
overlook or misunderstand. In our research, we have frequently encountered
statements to the effect that Osage trails followed the highlands. Facts do
not support such statements, which are obviously assumptions based on
Euro-American backgrounds. Euro-American trails generally followed the
highlands because they used wheeled vehicles. In this way, they could avoid
the torture of crossing innumerable small streams. Possibly, the defensive
advantage of holding to the high ground was also a consideration. Euro-
Americans reckon distances from hill to hill or ridge to ridge partly as an
outgrowth of this practice.

The pattern of Osage trails shows conclusively that, generally, they fol¬
low the stream courses. Furthermore, the left side of a stream is more often
followed than the right side. Osage myths support this practice of following
streams by invariably giving distances as so many valleys traveled. Since
Osage trails ran along north, south, east, and even west flowing streams, the
left bank preference does not seem to be a physiological factor since in many
cases the two sides match physically. Botanical factors must be ruled out for
the same reason. Therefore, the cause for this preference must be a cultural
factor.

We can find no ceremonial factor that would justify a left bank prefer¬
ence. However, one custom may have some bearing on the preference. In
peace, the lodges were faced to the east with the peace division to the left
and the war division to the right. In war, these positions were reversed. This
reversal took place in both war against humans and hunting since both ac¬
tivities took lives. West was the direction of death; east was the direction of
life. Likewise, the left was the side of life and the right the side of death.
Symbolically, a war or hunting party always left the village going west, even

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 71

if they were ultimately going east or some other direction. Thus, in symbol¬
ism, they were always on the left bank when they traveled to the hunt or
war and still on the left bank when they returned since they were at peace
and the directions were reversed back to normal or peace again. We doubt,
though, that this is the reason for the left bank preference. It is more likely
that the pattern was established by a much earlier people and the Osages
merely followed the practice by habit.

The network of Osage trails also shows an interconnecting system of
trails that tied the various villages to each other. Feeder trails also joined to
the major trails and connected various points within the empire. These con¬
necting and feeder trails enabled the Osages to keep in close touch with
each other and to rapidly reach anywhere in their empire in a surprisingly
short time. The Osages knew their trails very well, but any invading force
would find them to be death traps.

In general, the trails were wide enough for several persons to travel side
by side. However, in narrow valleys they tended to be single file paths. The
Black Dog Trail was a minimum of eight horsemen side by side in width.
All brush, trees, and large stones were cleared to this minimum width. Ford
approaches were ramped downstream on both sides. This was indeed a well-
engineered and well-constructed road. Years later, wheeled vehicles and even
cars could travel over it.

These Osage trails were not always single routes. That is, any single trail
often had many alternate trails. These alternate or branch trails were used
for a variety of reasons such as defensive measures, floods, and the search for
a particular plant food or drug en route. Wild fires and wood supply also
affected the alternate routes selected. Even the seasons affected the choice of
routes, for plants of different uses came at different times of the year. If
scouts suspected enemy ahead, ambushes could be avoided by taking an al¬
ternate route. These branches tended to go in the same general direction as
the main trail and ultimately rejoined it. The trails clung to the river courses
and valley as long as the terrain and destination permitted. When a trail
ascended to a highland, it descended as soon as possible into another valley.
Highlands left the people exposed to the elements and the eyes of a possible
enemy. In the valleys, they had the stream at their back and trees for shelter.
Most Osage villages and camps were located near stream mouths or in
bends of a river so they only had one side to defend, the stream forming a
barrier on the other sides.

Far out on the Plains, these same practices were followed. There are
streams on the Plains and most of these furnished both wood and water as
well as shelter from other men and the elements. Strict rules were enforced
to prevent unnecessary exposure on the great swells of the Plains. Guards

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

72 / Osage Empire

were posted on high points overlooking the scene of the hunt. This was to
forestall a surprise attack by an enemy and to protect the hunters. Rules of
the hunt forbad any hunter to pursue a buffalo out of the sight of these
guards. Any hunter who broke these rules was whipped with a whip. These
whips were later used as quirts or horse whips. While the pursuit of a buf¬
falo was permitted in a free hunt, it was not permitted in an organized hunt.
Only in the absence of the women was free hunting permitted, since the
men’s first duty was to protect the camp. Their second duty was to “make
meat.” Only after these duties were met, could recreational hunting take
place.

We will follow the same pattern with the Osage trails that we followed
with the villages. That is, we will start with Missouri and then go to Kansas
and lastly Oklahoma. Arkansas will be discussed in connection with the
other states.

Osage Trails in Missouri

The so-called Virginia Warriors Path is what we choose to call the Conti¬
nental Trail. This trail started on the Atlantic Seaboard in Virginia. It fol¬
lowed the Potomac River to the Potomac Gap where it crossed over to the
Monongahela River, which it followed to the Forks of the Ohio. Braddock
followed this route only to meet defeat at the hands of the French and In¬
dians at Duquesne (Forks of the Ohio). This trail then followed the Ohio,
primarily on the Kentucky side, to the Mississippi.

Although the point of entry into Missouri is debatable, the most likely
point is Cape St. Anthony or possibly Gray’s Point. In any event, the trail
did seek the highlands for about seventy-five miles and then followed head¬
water valleys across southern Missouri until it arrived between the head¬
waters of streams feeding the Osage and White Rivers. It then left Missouri
about due west of Carthage. We will continue this trail across Kansas later.
It is very probable that the Big Osages, and possibly both the Big and Little
Osages, entered Missouri by this route (see Fig. 12).

A Sac and Fox War Trail, as it was called later, led from the mouth of the
Des Moines River almost straight south to the mouth of the Gasconade
River on the Missouri. There it joined with an Osage trail, which forked at
the mouth of the Osage River. Another branch of the trail followed the
Missouri to its mouth and had a branch that led to St. Louis. One of the
forks at the mouth of the Osage River followed the Missouri to the Little
Osage Village in the Bend of the Missouri and continued on to Kansas City
(at the mouth of the Kaw/Kansas River). The other fork at the mouth of
the Osage River followed that stream to the Big Osage villages on its upper
reaches.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 73

A very unusual highland trail started at the mouth of the Niangua River
and went eastward to St. Genevieve. We say it is unusual because it primarily
followed the highlands. Osages customarily followed the streams, but special
circumstances may have caused an overland route to be followed or the
route was adopted from an earlier people. It is even possible that this route
was developed by Euro-American traders. At the Meramac River, a branch
of this trail went northeasterly to St. Louis. Apparently, there was a trail that
skirted the west bank of the Mississippi between the mouth of the Missouri
and New Madrid. This trail may have continued on southward.

Without any doubt, trails followed the Niangua, Pomme de Terre, and
Sac Rivers to connect the Osage River with the Continental Trail. These
trails united at the headwaters of the White River. From there a trail fol-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

74 / Osage Empire

lowed the White River to its nearest point to the Arkansas River where it
crossed the divide and was at the door of Arkansas Post. The trail then con¬
tinued southward to the Saline River and Red River at Natchitoches,
Louisiana. We have scant indication that the Osages used this approach to
Natchitoches to any extent. For the main part, they approached Natchitoches
from the northwest.

Two Osage trails led southward from the Missouri River and met on the
South Grand River near Clinton, Missouri. One of these starts near the
mouth of the Lamine River and follows this stream to the Grand (south of
the Missouri River). The other branch started at Fort Osage on the Mis¬
souri and followed the Grand southward. From the junction of these branch
trails, the trail crossed to the Osage River and then to the Vernon County,
Missouri, villages. This trail continued southward via the Marmaton and
Spring River to a point east of Neosho, Missouri. Continuing southward
into Arkansas, it followed the Illinois River south to the mouth of the Ca¬
nadian River on the Arkansas River. We will come back to this trail later.

Before we leave these Missouri trails we would like to mention that on
our map (Fig. 12), we took the liberty of placing the trail skirting the Mis¬
souri River on the south side instead of on the north side. This was done
as a convenience to avoid crossings. As a matter of accuracy, the trail for
the most part clung to the north or left bank. Sufficient data was not avail¬
able to date these trails. Also, these trails are not absolutely accurate—that
is, they only show approximations and should be used only with this under¬
standing.

Osage Trails in Kansas

In Missouri the Continental Trail west of Carthage, Missouri, was left in the
map on the headwaters of the Spring River as it entered Kansas. The trail
crossed Cherokee County, Kansas, and entered Labette County about four
miles south of Oswego, Kansas. It followed Labette and Spring Creeks
northwesterly across Labette County. The trail crossed the extreme northeast
corner of Montgomery County, Kansas, and entered Wilson County at the
southeast corner. After passing about one-half mile north of Neodesha, it
followed Fall River for a few miles then went straight west to Elk County.
From here, it followed the Elk River and its North Fork across Elk County
and left the county in its northwest corner. It followed the Hickory Creek
branch of the Little Walnut and Four Mile Creek of the Walnut River
across Butler County, Kansas.

In Sedgwick County, it passed north of Wichita to the Quivera (Wichita)
villages. From this point it followed the Arkansas to Gray County, Kansas.
It left the Arkansas in Gray County and caught the Cimarron near Cimar-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 75

ron, Kansas. From here, the Santa Fe Trail followed the Continental Trail into
Santa Fe and the Rio Grande settlements of the Desert Cultures. The later
California Trail, as laid out by Lieutenant Randolph B. Marcy, probably fol¬
lowed the Continental Trail on out to the Pacific. Coronado seems to have
followed Marcy s Canadian River route into Oklahoma then turned north¬
ward into Kansas.

There were five Osage entry points into Kansas from Missouri. The first
was at Kansas City (Kaw’s mouth), next was the Marais des Cygnes-Osage
River, third was the Little Osage River, fourth was the Marmaton River,
and lastly Spring River.

The latter was the Continental Trail (fifth entry), but it had a branch at
Neodesha which went southwest instead of northwest. This section was an
alternate Continental Trail which led to the Pawnee villages at Ferdinan-
dina (near Newkirk, Oklahoma). The alternate route branched at Grouse
Creek in Cowley County and went to the Pawnee villages on the Walnut
near Arkansas City. It then followed the Walnut River north to Timber
Creek (Winfield, Kansas) where it turned west and crossed the Arkansas at
the mouth of the Ninnescah. Here the two rejoined and followed an alter¬
nate trail that paralleled the Arkansas from Ferdinandina to Wichita. These
sections with a part linking Osage Mission and Neodesha made up the First
Buffalo Trail of the Osages. The Osages used this trail at an early date from
their Vernon County, Missouri, villages and it served as a war trail as well
as a buffalo trail. They followed the Marmaton to Bourbon County, Kansas,
and the Neosho to the Osage Mission Area (this route was the fourth entry
point) (see Fig. 13).

The third entry followed the Little Osage River into Kansas. It crossed
to the Neosho and followed that river northwesterly to Council Grove
in Morris County, Kansas. At the Burlington, Kansas, crossing this trail
crossed the second entry trail. The second entry trail followed the Marais
des Cygnes-Osage River into Kansas and crossed to the Burlington Cross¬
ing. From there it went southwesterly to Wichita.

At the Kaw’s mouth (Kansas City), the trail from the Little Osage village
on the Missouri followed the Kaw (Kansas) and Wakarusa Rivers south¬
westerly to Council Grove. Perhaps more significantly, a north-south trail
ran from the Kaw’s mouth (first entry) to Fort Scott and on south along the
Neosho-Grand to Three Forks on the Arkansas. This later became the basis
for the Military Supply Road between Fort Leavenworth and Fort Scott.
Eventually, the Military Road was extended to Fort Gibson at Three Forks
and Fort Smith downstream on the Arkansas.

Before we leave Kansas and go to the Osage trails in Oklahoma, we must
trace the Black Dog Trail. Like the Continental Trail (fifth entry), this trail

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 13. Notice the branches in the Continental Trail and how the Osages used portions of these trails as
hunting trails.

Osage Empire / 77

led from Spring River. It started east of Baxter Springs, Kansas, and roughly
followed the 37th parallel (Kansas-Oklahoma state line) to the extreme
southeast corner of Chautauqua County, Kansas. Here it dipped southward
to the Caney River and followed it to Elgin, Kansas, where it followed Buck
Creek. It continued west by following the west fork of Buck Creek and
then crossed over the divide to the headwaters of Elm Creek. At the junc¬
tion of Elm Creek and Salt Creek, the trail turned due west to the Arkansas
River, which it crossed at Ferdinandina. Here the trail branched, with the
north fork going up the Arkansas to the Ninnescah. The other fork contin¬
ued west to the Salt Fork, which it followed to the Salt Plains.

An alternate route was to follow the Caney River to Ozrow Falls near
Cedar Vale, Kansas, and then to follow the alternate Continental Trail either
to the Ninnescah or Ferdinandina crossings of the Arkansas. To the Osages,
the Black Dog Trail was also known as the Second Buffalo Trail.

Osage Trails in Oklahoma
General Trails

There were two significant north-south Osage trails in Oklahoma. One
entered Oklahoma from two points of the Kansas border. The other fol¬
lowed the Illinois River into Oklahoma from Arkansas. By following the
Neosho-Grand and Spring River into Oklahoma, the Osages could follow
the Neosho-Grand to Three Forks. This trail then followed the Arkansas to
Sand Springs, Oklahoma, and then turned south and a little west to the
mouth of Little River on the Canadian. From here, it continued south to
the headwaters of Muddy Boggy, which it followed on down to the Middle
Boggy and then to the Red River, and on to Natchitoches.

The Illinois River trail followed this river to Webber Falls near the
mouth of the Canadian on the Arkansas. It followed the Canadian and its
southern feeder streams south to the Middle Boggy where it joined with
the trail described above. By continuing down the Red River, the Osages
could come upon Natchitoches from the northwest. These two trails were
the basic routes followed by the later military roads as well as the Sedalia
and Baxter Springs cattle trails (see Fig. 14).

We have traced the First and Second Buffalo Trails under the Osage Trails
in Kansas. The Third Buffalo Trail left the Claremore Villages between the
Verdigris and Neosho-Grand then followed Bird Creek northwest to the
Elm and Salt Creek fork. From this point, it followed the Second Buffalo
Trail to the Plains. A branch of this trail followed Salt Creek south, and then,
north of Fairfax, Oklahoma, it turned west to cross the Arkansas above
the mouth of Red Rock Creek. By following Red Rock Creek, the trail
reached the Plains.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 14. Note the five buffalo trails and where they terminate.

Osage Empire / 79

Early American explorers were very familiar with the Fourth Buffalo
Trail, since they often used portions of it. This trail ran upstream from Three
Forks along the Arkansas River to the mouth of the Cimarron River. It
then followed the Cimarron out to the Plains. A branch of the north-south
Neosho-Grand River route turned west at the Canadian River and even¬
tually crossed to the Washita River and thus reached the hunting grounds
in Southern Oklahoma.

Francis La Flesche recorded a detailed description of three Osage hunting
trails. 84 He numbers these trails i, 2, and 3. To avoid confusion with the four
Osage Buffalo Trails which are also numbered, I have named La Flesche s
three trails. His first trail will be called Two Little Hills Trail, his second
trail, Heart Stays Trail, and the third trail has been named The Upland Forest
Trail. All these trails start in Kansas, but they are mainly in Oklahoma. This
location would date the trails as being used between 1822 and 1870. The
distance between camps has been included in parentheses, the first number
indicating the distance between camps and the second number denoting the
distance from the starting point.

Two Little Hills Trail

The Two Little Hills Trail starts at a village called Wa ha Ka U le (meaning
undetermined), which was located near Pa se Shin ka Lo pa (Two Little
Hills). This was probably Saucy Tsi slur s village at the junction of the Ver¬
digris and Elk Rivers two and one-half miles north of Independence,
Kansas.

Camp number one was called Pa le Wa kon ta Ke Ka ha (Medicine Man
Creek) and was near Coffeyville, Kansas. A strange Indian was found dead
in a cave at this place (distance 16 mi, 16 mi).

Next, was Pe tse Molt kon Ka ha (Fire Medicine Creek) or Ne Pe she (Bad
Water). Smoke was seen rising from this creek in all seasons. This second
camp was probably at the junction of Cheyenne Creek and the Little Caney
(distance 20 mi, 36 mi).

Kon za Wa ha pe was the name of the next camp (a Kansas Indian won a
footrace at this place). This was the third camp on the Two Little Hills Trail.
It was probably at or near the junction of the Caney River and the Little
Caney a little south of Copan, Oklahoma (distance 15 mi, 51 mi).

The fourth camp was at Bartlesville, Oklahoma, in the Johnstone Park.
Its name was Usu E ha Shin ka (Little Mouth Forest). Once there had been
a large bend in the Caney here, and the river had almost bypassed the bend.
Thus, the Little Mouth name and the mouth had a wooded area on it—
hence, the name Little Mouth Forest (distance 12 mi, 63 mi).

Ne Log tty (Good Water) was the next camp. Nelagony Creek passes by

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

80 / Osage Empire

the old depot at Nelagony, Oklahoma, which was the old campsite. Evi¬
dently, the trail had led up Sand Creek to Okesa, Oklahoma, where it cut
over to Nelagony. This was the fifth camp on the Two Little Hills Trail (dis¬
tance 17 mi, 80 mi).

Pawhuska, the present Osage Capital, was the sixth campsite on this trail.
Its original Osage name was Ne ah he He sko pa (Deep Ford). For many
years, Pawhuska was called Deep Ford. This campsite was near the cemetery
and the ford crossed Bird Creek above Clear Creek (distance 8 mi, 88 mi).

The seventh camp was near Fairfax, Oklahoma. Its Osage name was
Ne ske le Ka ha (Saltwater Creek) (distance 25 mi, 113 mi).

Ne Shu tsy (Red River) was the Osage name for the Arkansas River. This
was the site of the eighth camp, which was on a small creek named Mo she
Scab (I am White). This crossing was about midway between the mouth of
the Salt Fork and the mouth of Red Rock Creek (distance 12 mi, 135 mi).

La Flesche and the rest of us are confused on the next two camps, num¬
bers nine and ten. He gives no tenth camp. He gives the name Ne Shu tsy
Shin ka (Little Red River) for the Salt Fork. This should be Ne ske le Ne
(Saltwater River) because the Little Red River was the Osage name for the
Little Arkansas River. It is possible, though, that this was also another Osage
name for the Salt Fork. However, the Cimarron was also called Ne Shu tsy;
early accounts call it the Red Fork. The trail crossed the Salt Fork at about
White Eagle, Oklahoma. We will pick up La Flesche’s numbering of the
camps with number eleven but it was really the ninth camp.

La Flesche’s eleventh camp was northwest of Ponca City, Oklahoma, on
the Bois de Arc Creek. The Osage name for this camp was Moh tse Sta Ka
ha (Bow Wood Creek). Today it carries the Osage name in French (distance
20 mi, 155 mi).

La Flesche did not give the twelfth camp, but it had to be on the Salt
Fork near Pond Creek, Oklahoma. These distances from camp to camp var¬
ied with the difficulty of travel; they were in more open country now and
travel was much easier (distance 33 mi, 190 mi).

The thirteenth campsite had two names, Son tse Shin ka (Little Upland
Forest) and Ne ne Po sta (Shooting Springs). This campsite was on the
east edge of the Salt Plains. Actually, there were two campsites that were
very close together so their names were often used interchangeably. How¬
ever, those who traveled on the Two Little Hills Trail customarily used the
wooded area and those who moved on the Heart Stays Trail used the spring
site. It must be kept in mind that while we divide these trails, campsites and
other trails were often combined as alternates to the route we are tracing
(distance 20 mi, 210 mi).

Ne ske le U su Ugra in a literal translation means Salt Lowland Forest, but

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 81

in a free translation it would mean Salt Plains. At this fourteenth camp, the
Osages often gathered rock salt. It was located at the west edge of the Salt
Plains near Cherokee, Oklahoma (distance 15 mi, 225 mi).

At the fifteenth camp, ten Pawnee warriors were killed in the woods. The
Osages called this camp Ho tse He Pa se (Cedar Tree Hills),but they probably
had another name that referred to the slaying of the ten Pawnee. This camp
was probably on Eagle Chief Creek south of Alva, Oklahoma (distance
20 mi, 245 mi).

The sixteenth camp also had two names, Ah le Pa se Shu tsy (Red Hill
Top) and Mo ha Pa se Shu tsy (Red Cliffs). This was also a camping place on
the Heart Stays Trail. It was on the left bank (east side) of the Cimarron
River across from the Alabaster Caverns State Park in present-day Okla¬
homa (distance 20 mi, 265 mi).

At the seventeenth camp, they were far out on the Plains. This camp was
called Tsi She pe a go (Buffalo Range). Osages describe this place as a large
basin with a gap like a door at the west edge. Gate, Oklahoma, is at the site
of this door or gate in the basin. This camp was probably at Doby Springs
between Buffalo and Gate, Oklahoma (distance 35 mi, 300 mi).

To short He (Papaw Bark), was the eighteenth camp. The papaw was very
useful to the Osages. The bark was used for thread and the fruit was used
for food. It was considered to be a sacred tree. To find the papaw this far out
on the Plains seems strange. However, it was very convenient having the
bark available here because the Osages would cut buffalo ribs off the carcass,
flatten them, and then sew them together with papaw thread. The entire
blanket of ribs was then thrown over a rack for drying. This camp was very
likely on Horse Creek north of Gate, Oklahoma (distance 25 mi, 325 mi).

The full meaning of the name of the nineteenth and last camp, which
the Osages called, Ne ske le Ka ske pe, cannot be determined. From what can
be determined about the name, it seems they must have found rock salt here.
The camp was probably on the Cimarron near where it enters Oklahoma
from Kansas north of Mocane, Oklahoma. This was the westernmost camp
found in the records. However, indirect evidence indicates they hunted
much farther west than this location, but these were probably tepee camps
and left no trace (distance 20 mi, 345 mi).

Heart Stays Trail

The name of the village where the Heart Stays Trail started was No tse Wa
spe (Heart Stays). This was at present-day Oswego, Kansas, on the Neosho-
Grand River.

Although the first camp on this trail was omitted by La Flesche, we
would place it near the west side of Chetopa, Kansas (distance 10 mi, 10 mi).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

82 / Osage Empire

Wa se Tun Ho e was the Osage name for the Verdigris River. They ob¬
tained green paint here near Coffeyville, Kansas. This was the second camp
on the Heart Stays Trail (distance 25 mi, 35 mi).

The name of the third camp was Ka he Kon se ha (Two Creeks Running
Parallel to Each Other). Clearly, this should be between the Little and
Middle Caney west of Caney, Kansas; however, the campsite was near the
southeastern corner of Chautauqua County, Kansas (distance 20 mi, 45 mi).

The fourth camp was also a camp on the Black Dog Trail. We have a
variety of names for this camp, Ne ha Ka ha (Falls Creek), Gra to Me Shin
ka Usu (Little Hawk Womans Grove), and Gra to Me Shin ka (Little Hawk
Woman). Falls Creek is a small intermittent stream which flows north along
the west base of the north spur of Tinker Hill. It enters the Caney River
just below the ford into what is called the bass hole. Little Hawk Womans
Grove is still standing on the left side of the ford; the river curls around the
grove on the south and east side. The Little Hawk Woman campsite was
adjacent to the grove. This is one-half mile south of Elgin, Kansas, in Osage
County, Oklahoma.

The fifth camp was named Mo shon Ah ke ta Ka ha (Protector of the Land
Creek). Today, the Osage name has been changed to Acker Creek. It was in
Range 7E, Township 29N, Section 21 of Osage County, Oklahoma (dis¬
tance 20 mi, 85 mi).

Two names were applied to the sixth camp, Ne scab Lo scali (Place Be¬
tween Two Rivers), which is now called Beaver Creek, and Tsa non sa Che
ha pe (in effect, place where a fence was built to protect against buffalo).
There is a story that the buffalo stampeded through this camp at one time,
so an earthen wall was built around the campsite to prevent it happen¬
ing again. This camp was located in the fork of Spring Creek and Beaver
Creek—Range 6E, Township 29N, Section 19, Osage County, Oklahoma
(distance 10 mi, 95 mi).

La Flesche was again confused at the Arkansas River. He omitted the
seventh camp entirely and placed the eighth camp far down Elm Creek
near its junction with Salt Creek. This might have been an alternate camp
on the Two Little Hills Trail or some other trail, but it could not have been
on the Heart Stays Trail because it was too far off the course of the trail.
Although La Flesche also confuses the ninth camp, we can with certainty
place it at the old Pawnee Deer Creek villages on the Arkansas River at the
Ferdinandina crossing. We will retain La Flesche s numbering of the camps
insofar as possible (distance 20 mi, 115 mi).

Both the Two Little Hills Trail and Heart Stays Trail shared the camp on
Bois de Arc Creek northwest of Ponca City, Oklahoma. This was the tenth
camp on the Heart Stays Trail (distance 15 mi, 130 mi).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 83

From La Flesche s naming of the ninth camp on the Heart Stays Trail and
the eighth camp of the Two Little Hills Trail, we deduce he means the Salt
Fork instead of the Little Arkansas. To further confuse the matter, when he
discusses the Heart Stays Trail, he gives this as the ninth camp on the Two
Little Hills Trail. To maintain his camp numbering, we will label this camp
ten B on the Heart Stays Trail. This was near Pond Creek, Oklahoma, on the
Salt Fork (distance 15 mi, 145 mi).

The name of another camp was U pa le. The meaning cannot be ascer¬
tained, but it is a personal name. The son of this man was wounded in battle,
and the old man remained at this place caring for his son. A creek was
named for him. This was the eleventh camp. Apparently, this was also near
Pond Creek, Oklahoma, but more to the north so it must have been an
alternate camp (distance 20 mi, 150 mi).

La Flesche omitted the twelfth camp altogether. Clearly he was badly
confused in this general area and never had a chance to get it straightened
out. He gives the thirteenth camp as the Little Upland Forest, as well as
Shooting Springs. These were both camps on the Two Little Hills Trail and
Heart Stays Trail. The distance traveled tells us there could not have been
another (twelfth) camp in this area. This trail had now reached the east edge
of the Salt Plains (distance 20 mi, 160 mi).

Moh sa He (A Thicket of Arrow Wood) was the name of the fourteenth
camp. Probably, this was on the west edge of the Salt Plains on the Salt Fork
(distance 15 mi, 175 mi).

An Osage man of the Lo Ha (Buffalo Back) clan died at the spot where
the fifteenth camp was located. Although the meaning of the name has been
lost, the Osages called it Moh en ku ah ha. Possibly, this was near Alva, Okla¬
homa, on the Salt Fork (distance 20 mi, 195 mi).

The sixteenth camp was again shared by the Two Little Hills and Heart
Stays Trails. This was the Red Hill Top or Red Cliffs already mentioned.
The sharing of campsites saved the labor of erecting wickiup framework
(distance 20 mi, 215 mi).

A departure in the two trails occurs at this point. The seventeenth camp
was called Ho tse He Ka he (Cedar Tree Creek). This camp was about mid¬
way between Alabaster Caverns State Park and Woodward, Oklahoma (dis¬
tance 15 mi, 230 mi).

Ne ne Po sta (Shooting Springs) was the eighteenth and final camp on the
Heart Stays Trail. There were two springs about fifteen miles apart in this
area. One was clear and sweet and the other was black and bitter. The
springs had a movement that caused the Osages to call them shooting
springs. In all probability, this camp was in or near the Boiling Springs State
Park, Oklahoma (distance 15 mi, 245 mi).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

84 / Osage Empire
The Upland Forest Trail

Son tse Ugre (The Upland Forest) was a name of Claremore Ill’s village on
the Verdigris River. It was the starting place of this last Osage trail.

La Flesche omitted the first camp but it would almost positively be near
Coffey ville, Kansas (distance io mi, io mi).

It is very noticeable that The Upland Forest Trail covered more in a day’s
travel than the other two trails. The second camp is given as being on the
Arkansas west of Hominy, Oklahoma. Even the Osages could not make
such a trip from west of Coffeyville in one day. La Flesche omits the third
camp and places the fourth camp south of Bartlesville. We have changed his
camp numbering to conform to geography and reality. The second camp
was the Little Mouth Forest at Bartlesville, Oklahoma. This was the fourth
camp on the Two Little Hills Trail (distance 40 mi, 50 mi).

We have changed La Flesche’s second camp to the third camp. This site
was called Pa Im Te pa (Round Hills) and was on the Arkansas River near
Blackburn, Oklahoma, and west of Hominy, Oklahoma (distance 45 mi,
95 mi).

Wa Sop pe U tsy (Where Black Bears are Plentiful) is called Black Bear
Creek today. This was about eight miles northwest of Morrison, Oklahoma
(distance 30 mi, 125 mi).

The fifth camp on this express trail was probably near Enid, Oklahoma.
It was called Tse le Ke he (Big Lake) (distance 30 mi, 155 mi).

We cannot fully translate the name for the sixth camp, but Shon tse Lu
Sop pe, the Osage name for this camp, has something to do with castrating
a horse or animal. This was on the extreme headwaters of Turkey Creek
northwest of Enid, Oklahoma, near Helena, Oklahoma (distance 23 mi,
178 mi).

Hu lah Ki he ka Ka ha (Eagle Chief Creek) was the seventh camp. It was
on Eagle Chief Creek south of Alva, Oklahoma (distance 30 mi, 208 mi).

The final and eighth camp of The Upland Forest Trail was called Tse He
Tun ka (Bed of Big Lake). This was near Boiling Springs State Park, Wood¬
ward, Oklahoma (distance 35 mi, 243 mi).

CONCLUSIONS

This summary of the routes followed by the Osage trails shows an exten¬
sive system over which the Osages moved in war and peace. It is not sur¬
prising that so many of these routes became major roads in later times. What
is surprising about these routes is that none of them came into use as major
routes as long as the Osages controlled them. This is true of the network of
route density in Missouri, Kansas, and of one route in Oklahoma. Interstate

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Empire / 85

44 utilizes many Osage routes in both Oklahoma and Missouri that touch
on network centers. Railroads earlier had touched the Kansas centers. How¬
ever, it is significant that the network center of these trails in Osage County,
Oklahoma, has no modern major routes and that no part became a major
route.

Either by an accident of history or by design, all major routes of travel
skirted territory held by the Osages. The routes that evolved came after the
Osages no longer controlled the area. Such consistent practices almost al¬
ways indicate something more than accidents of history. One may argue
that the Missouri and Arkansas Rivers offered natural routes to the West.
This is true enough, but it is significant that these routes were not available
until the Osages were removed from the Missouri by the Treaty of 1808 and
from the Arkansas-Canadian by the Treaty of 1818.

We would also like to point out that the shortest, fastest, most direct route
lay through the Osage country. Even as late as the 1850s, this route was so
little used by the California gold miners that it has all but escaped the at¬
tention of Frontier historians. Only a few pioneers mention using it in go¬
ing to and from the gold fields. Surely, there must have been some reason for
this bypass practice in United States history.

One may also wonder why the former Kansas home of the Osages north
of their present purchased reservation filled so rapidly. By the same token,
the lands of Indians to the east, south, and southwest also were quickly
settled. By 1892, the only lands left available for homesteading lay in the
Cherokee Outlet west of the Osages. This was their hunting grounds long
before the Cherokee dared to cross the Mississippi. It was the last Osage
hunting ground. Here the Great American Frontier ended in 1893. Only the
million and one-half acre Osage reservation remained to be settled.

After 1893, some small pocket areas here and there throughout the west
remained unsettled; however, these were almost universally undesirable be¬
cause of aridity and other natural reasons and were also areas set aside as
national reserves. The Osage reservation was desirable land. By 1900, the
Euro-American culture had swirled around the Osages for two hundred and
twenty-five years. While the Osages had been influenced by the majority
culture, they still held it at an arm’s length away. It is this hard-core of
Osage culture that turned the grinding land hunger of Manifest Destiny
around their domain instead of through it. First, they fought with bows and
arrows, then with guns. However, they always fought with their wits. It was
1925, after two hundred and fifty years of conflict, that the Osages were
finally overwhelmed. The last of the fighting Indians had finally been in¬
undated with Euro-Americans, but they still fought for their rights in the
courts and in the halls of Congress. Their vast domain had been reduced to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

86 / Osage Empire

an underground reservation of petroleum—the land was gone. In the Osage
language the land is called Molt short and the Earth is called Hun ka, which
means the Sacred One. The Great Creator brought the sky and earth to¬
gether to make the land, which made life on Earth possible. He did this as
the last act of creation, and then he said “O pah'’ (“It is finished”).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Relationships with
Euro-Americans,
1675-1803

CONTRASTS

Introduction

There is no doubt that the Osage culture differed from the culture of West¬
ern civilization. Equally evident is that these differences were a source of
friction between the two cultures. The Osages could clearly see the supe¬
riority of Western trade goods to their own. However, they considered the
other cultural aspects of Western civilization to be inferior to their own (see

Fig- O)-

Land ownership concepts evolve from a diversity of geographic and cul¬
tural sources, but a decisive factor is the role land plays in food production.
A culture that obtains its major food supply from the hunt will have a dif¬
ferent concept of land ownership than a culture that acquires its food from
agriculture. Each culture benefits from its own type of land ownership. A
hunting culture benefits from communal ownership of land simply because
game animals do not arrange themselves evenly over the land. Open ranges
on the early cattle ranching frontier were used for the same reason, but en¬
closure (fencing) eventually ended open ranges. The enclosure laws of En¬
gland were enacted to encourage production of wool for the growing tex¬
tile industries, but these laws destroyed the common grazing areas and
displaced large numbers of farmers. Many of these displaced farmers came
to the American colonies hungry for lands of their own.

Like land ownership, the Osage economy differed from that of Euro-
Americans. An economy based on hunting and a limited agriculture cannot
support a population as large as an economy based on agriculture, trade, and
manufacturing. European justification for seizing lands owned by Indians
was based upon this so-called highest use argument.

Some technologies are visibly superior. Muskets and rifles clearly have

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

88 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

| CULTURAL CONTRASTS 1

OSAGE CULTURE

WESTERN CIVILIZATION

Land

Title

communal-all lands owned
in common by all the
people

communal-public domain
or crown owned
royal-owned by monarch
private-owned by indivi¬
duals or the church

1 Land Policies il

Acquired lands by merging
with owners, displacement,
or annihilation of owners.

Acquired lands by purchase,
merger, displacement, an¬
nihilation, or subjugation
of owners.

Occupied lands in villages,
hunting camps and by main¬
taining patrols of Protectors
or hunting parties.

Occupied lands by farming
and in communities.

| Economies 1!

Food supply came from hun¬
ting, gathering, and supple¬
mental agriculture.

Food supply came from in¬
tensive agriculture and
herding.

Simple manufacture in¬
cluding tanning and utility
articles

Highly developed manufac¬
turing of varied articles

Trade by direct barter of
simple articles

Trade by medium of ex¬
change for varied products

1! Religion I

Highly developed and tole¬
rant

Highly developed but in¬
tolerant

Fig. 15. Cultural comparisons

advantages over spears and bows. The advantages of technologies such as
fertilization of fields to increase production are not immediately evident.
The Osages were quick to see the advantages of the visible technologies
that could readily be fitted into their culture. In time, they adopted some of
the less evident technologies, but only those they could use with little ad¬
justment to their culture. Their core culture remained intact throughout the
period of 1675-1803.

Western people rarely visualize Indians as having well-defined policies.
The Osages had a set of policies which they followed with great consis¬
tency, such as their fixed policy of opposition to intruders. Their distinction
among three types of intruders was clearly defined. A traveler or party who
crossed Osage territory uninvited but who used only what was necessary

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 89

in their passage was one type of intruder. Uninvited individuals or groups
who plundered the resources were a second type of intruder. The third type
of intruder was those people who settled on Osage lands without invitation.

Another notable Osage policy was to take no major action without first
evaluating the situation. For this reason, Osages frequently remained out of
sight and observed a situation before they took a major action. This policy
is so deeply ingrained into the Osage character that it is often mistaken for
an inherited trait. It is easy to confuse the policy with the general Indian
reserve and sense of order so often noted by Euro-Americans.

If the Osages were not the most deeply religious Indians in North America,
they were close to being the most religious. Until 1850, they refused under
any circumstances to abandon their religion and accept the Christianity of
Western civilization. As a matter of policy, they respected the rights of oth¬
ers to believe as they wished, and they reserved the same rights for them¬
selves. For hours and with great respect they would listen to Euro-American
ministers expound their faith, but they did not abandon their own faith.

Land Policies

A major contrast between the Osage land policies and the policies of West¬
ern nations hinged upon the concept of subject areas. Having an alien
people subject to their rule, by force or otherwise, was unknown to the
Osages. Their practice was to adopt alien individuals and to either merge
with whole groups or to force them to move out of the desired area. Failing
in these measures, the conquest was either abandoned or a total war was
undertaken. But the idea of subjugation was never used.

Trade with the Euro-Americans made a new Osage land policy manda¬
tory. Under this policy, Euro-Americans were permitted subsistence and
distribution bases in Osage territory. Yet, these were carefully observed, and
periodic bluff raids were used to limit their size. Trading posts were encour¬
aged near their villages and eastern borders. Posts to the west and southwest
were discouraged.

Osage land title was held by occupation, conquest, and the ability to en¬
force ones own claim. Euro-American trade bases were on Osage lands
either by consent or invitation. Enforcement of Osage territorial claims
were violent, graphic, and effective. Intruders of the second and third types
were killed on or near the spot of violation. Their heads were cut off and
placed on stakes. Indians usually had no difficulty in reading these graphic
signs—the evidence of violation and the results were both there as plain
as day. Since decapitation was an especially serious matter in most Indian
religions, it was an effective deterrent among Indians. However, Euro-
Americans either did not read signs very well or chose to ignore them. Thus,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

90 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

the effectiveness of enforcing territorial claims was weakened, and in the
process Euro-Americans blamed the Osages for the consequences of their
own trespassing.

The discovery of the Americas presented a dilemma for the Western co¬
lonial nations. Their desire to claim these new lands as their own conflicted
with the fact that the lands were already owned and occupied by native
nations. By mutual consent of the major colonial powers of Europe, the
Western nations accepted their claims as valid among themselves. Although
they disputed the claims made to some specific areas, the right to claim and
attach American lands to their empires was never disputed. Under these ar¬
rangements, the native nations were in almost the same situation as the
overseas provinces of the Roman Empire, who operated under their own
laws and rule in subjection to the approval of the Roman government. 1
Thus, the Osage nation, in the European mind, was a subject nation or prov¬
ince of, first, France, then Spain and the United States.

As far as the Indian nations were concerned, these arrangements were
mere theory until the European nations were strong enough to impose this
agreement upon the Indian nations. Each of the three major colonial powers
(Spain, France, and England) used their own individual means to impose
their overlordship. Spain used the sword and cross very effectively in estab¬
lishing themselves as the supreme ruling power in their claimed areas.
France accepted alien peoples as they are and imposed their rule through
trade. England used trade and massive agricultural settlement to slowly ease
Indians out of their lands and onto other Indian lands. Indian resistance was
crushed by forces from a firmly settled base. This latter stage was inherited
by the United States. This discussion refers to the actual practices, which
differed from the official policies. 2

The extinguishment of land title—like establishment of overlordship—
was a departure from official policy. 3 It seems clear that the Western powers
were officially attempting to justify the seizure of Indian lands, leaving the
actual seizure procedures to those present on the scene. This is strong evi¬
dence that Western civilization was evolving a new concept in government,
which was later called imperialism. Eventually, two concepts that evolved
from the Indian land seizure experience pushed the United States into the
leadership of Western civilization. These were Manifest Destiny and Eco¬
nomic Imperialism. While it would be interesting to pursue the evolution
of these concepts, our purpose here is to contrast the Osage and Euro-
American concepts of land ownership.

Officially, all lands not physically occupied by Indians were considered to
be Crown or Royal property. 4 In actual practice some form of compensa¬
tion was even paid for what appeared to Euro-Americans to be unused, va-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 91

cant, or waste lands. The truth is, however, that all Osage lands were used; they
were seldom vacant, and waste lands produced game animals which were
used for food. Osages lived on their land in villages and hunting camps.
Since their lands were heavily patrolled by special Protectors of the Land
and hunting parties, all Osage lands were occupied. In practice and officially,
areas not physically occupied by villages were available to be purchased, or
in some way compensation was to be paid.

Clearly, if this policy of extinguishing the Indian land title was imple¬
mented—and it was—it would ultimately compact Indians into an increas¬
ingly smaller area. Equally evident is the eventual destruction of all hunting
cultures. Amidst the turmoil created by this policy, in 1889, the Commis¬
sioner of Indian Affairs stated this solution to the dilemma (one that was
not resolved in colonial days nor later): “The Indian must conform to the
white man’s ways, peacefully if they will, forcibly if they must.” 5 A more
enlightened view, if not a solution, was expressed by Eric Thompson, “This
disintegration of native culture before the advance of ‘civilization’ is sad, for
material advances do not bring greater happiness or compensate for lost
spiritual values.” 6 Our purpose here is not to cry, “Lo! the poor Indian,” but
to show contrasts in viewpoints. If the Osage people are to continue to
“stand in two worlds,” they must keep one foot anchored in their past and
keep the other foot planted in the majority culture. The two bases must
balance or the people will totter and fall.

Economies

Compared to those of Western civilization, the Osage economy was not
sophisticated, but when compared to the economies of their neighbors, it
was well advanced. In 1675 to 1800, their neighbors were other Indian na¬
tions and scattered settlements of Euro-Americans. The Euro-American
neighbors of this period had a very inferior economy. It is a small wonder
that these fragmentary representatives of Western civilization did not im¬
press the Osages.

Osages procured their food supply from three sources. The hunt sup¬
plied a large amount of meat and raw materials for some manufacture. It is
probable that the gathering activities were next in importance to the people.
From these they not only garnered a large supply of vegetable foods but also
other raw materials of the economy. Agriculture was the third source of
food, but it stood more as a supplementary source instead of a primary
source.

Before the opening of large scale fur trading, the Osage traded some pelt¬
ries and buffalo robes to their eastern neighbors. Catlinite (red pipestone)
from their northern neighbors was exchanged for black pipestone. Fine pelts,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

92 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

abrading stones, and some finished leather clothing were traded to their
southern neighbors for sea shells from the Gulf of Mexico. However, the
greatest volume of trade was with their western neighbors. This was pri¬
marily a food trade of Caddo corn for Osage berries, nuts, and potatoes
(these were not the so-called Irish potato but a wild legume related to the
Peruvian potato).

After the fur trade with Euro-Americans opened, the Osages became
trade entrepreneurs or middlemen between the Euro-Americans and the
tribes to the west. The Osages quickly learned the dangers of food poison¬
ing from foods cooked in brass or copper pots and pans. These they traded
to the Caddo people and they kept the cast iron pots for themselves. Trade
knives and hatchets were normally traded without grips or handles, but
some handles were added by the Osages before they were traded to the Cad-
doeans. Bow wood of Osage Orange (Bois de Arc, Hedge, Bodark) was in
great demand.

Osage Orange is probably the best bow wood in the world. It surpasses
the English yew, lemon wood, hickory, and ash as bow wood. Two types of
Osage bows were made and traded by the Osage. The long flat bow was
often six feet or more in length and almost universally made of Osage
Orange. A short “horse bow” of three to four feet in length was also made.
This was usually rounded on the outside and flat on the inside with raw-
hide thongs wrapped side-by-side across the length. Smooth bark (pig nut)
hickory was a favored wood for these bows, although some were made of
Osage Orange or ash.

Aside from handles and bows the Osages were also proficient in other
manufacturing. Furs in their homeland were good but not as fine as those
taken farther north. The pelage (thickness and texture of the hair) of Osage
furs was thinner and coarser than northern furs. To compensate for this, the
Osages had developed better tanning methods. Even in their treatment of
raw peltry, the Osages used better preparation. This might have had some
bearing on the fact that Euro-American free trappers and brigade trappers
never operated in Osage territory. Instead of free trappers, the post system
prevailed on the Lower Missouri and Arkansas Rivers. Only on the Upper
Missouri and in other cold climates did the free and brigade trappers obtain
better prepared peltry. Yet, in candor, it must be noted that the Osages dis¬
couraged such Euro-American trapping.

In contrast to the Osage economy, Euro-American food procurement
was primarily through agriculture with herding as a secondary source of
food. The primary distinction here is the presence of domestic animals.
Osage agriculture could not be as extensive or intensive as Euro-American
agriculture because of the absence of draft animals. Likewise, herding as a

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 93

source of meat could not exist, because the Osage had no domestic herd or
flock animals. This was all a matter of availability and not of superiority,
however.

Euro-American trade was not only more diversified than Osage trade,
but it had the advantage of a medium of exchange. The evolution of this
superiority to the Osage shows the advantage of a maritime culture over a
continental culture. Creating a medium of exchange is a peculiar aspect of
maritime cultures. Typical of continental cultures, the Osage used direct
barter in trade. In direct barter a trader must find someone who not only
has something the trader wants, but the owner must also be willing to trade
it for what the trader has to offer. A medium of exchange such as gold and
silver has a standard of acceptable value and, therefore, is widely accepted in
exchange for any trade goods. Obviously, this provides a greater flexibility
in trade than direct barter, since a trader simply has to find what he wants
and trade a medium of exchange for it.

Mediums of exchange have been in use since the Phoenicians introduced
them into the trade of Western civilization. However, their use in large scale
trade and role in the rise of national states did not appear until vast amounts
of gold and silver came to Western civilization through Spanish imports
from the Americas. In 1492, the total gold and silver supply of Western civi¬
lization was slightly less than $200,000,000 or about two dollars per person.
By 1600 there was an 855 percent increase in these metals; in 1700 a 1,984
percent increase; and in 1800 a 3,786 percent increase. Using 1934 as a com¬
parison year, Western civilization had about $32 billion in gold and silver.
This would be nearly $40 per person. 7

The changes brought to Western civilization by the huge increase of gold
and silver also affected the Osages. While a minority of Europeans enjoyed
a relatively high living standard in 1500, the vast majority of Europeans had
a wretched living standard. By contrast, all classes of the Osage were better
fed, better clothed, and better housed than the average European in 1500.
The infusion of gold and silver with a five-fold increase of available land
caused a revolution in Western civilization. While this European revolution
improved the condition of the average European, it had a reverse effect on
the condition of the Osage.

In matters of trade and the rise of the national states, American gold and
silver brought about the practice of mercantilism. Abundant land destroyed
feudalism and brought about individualism. It is ironic that their beloved
land held the foundation for the ultimate destruction of the Osage culture.
The resources of their land fed the mercantilism of national states and the
surface of their land fueled the flames of land hunger in the former Euro¬
pean serfs.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

94 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

We must review the principles of mercantilism to see how this affected
the Osage people. A basic premise of mercantilism is that gold and silver are
wealth. One of the secondary premises is that the wealthiest state will also
become the most powerful state. The third premise is that in order to ac¬
quire gold and silver, a nation must have colonies to supply raw materials so
the mother country can be self-sufficient. This meant the mother country
would be able to sell more than it bought in foreign trade and thus acquire
a favorable balance of trade that would be paid in gold and silver. Implemen¬
tation of these premises caused this practice to be called Imperialism be¬
cause it required the possession of colonies.

A discussion of the fallacies in this economic theory would lead us far
from our purpose. However, it should be evident that it was the ultimate
desire for gold and silver that propelled Spain, France, and England into co¬
lonialism. By the same token, it brought first the French and then the Span¬
ish into trade relationships with the Osage. Thus, we find the French and
Spanish concentrating on the two resources of the Osage that gave the
highest return for the amount invested. These were products of the hunt
plus lead and zinc ores. Furs, hides, and tallow were the main products of the
hunt that French and Spanish traders desired. Lead and zinc mining held no
interest to the Osage of this period as long as the mining did not interfere
with the game animals.

The rising, growing middle class in Western civilization could now af¬
ford the furs of nobility. But, it was not the need for furs that created a fur
market. Rather, the prestige of wearing furs created the fur market. Even
the poor could now afford to wear buffalo hide shoes and light their cot¬
tages with tallow candles. Their old wooden sabots were discarded, along
with their saucer lights. Under the demand for hunt products, the Osage
began to deplete their supply of fur and game animals. Through expansion,
they were able to defer the effects of the trade in hunt products until i860,
but poverty and lowered living standards with roots in the 1600s struck
them in the 1800s.

In our urban-industrial culture, it is sometimes difficult to comprehend
the land hunger of Euro-Americans between 1500 and 1910. One must bear
in mind that in 1500 land was the basis of all wealth. With only minor
exceptions, the land was owned by the nobility, either the nobility of the
church or the temporal nobility. The vast majority tilled soil they did not
own and were serfs or peons. Both serfdom and peonage are forms of slav¬
ery that tie a human to the land. When the land changes ownership the
estate includes the serfs or peons.

Occasionally a kindly lord would give a loved serf a few acres of land,
and thus a small class of yeoman farmers came into existence. It is small

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 95

wonder, then, that a five-fold increase in land area whetted the land appetite
of European serfs. They now had hopes that someday they would be yeomen
or even lords. Land ownership meant more than land possession—it in¬
cluded position, political influence, and protection of laws. Once they ar¬
rived in America, no human power could deny these immigrants land
ownership, and thus the largest number of middle class farmers in history
was created. It is with good reason that land and property are called real
estate.

A growing decrease of game and the “not to be denied, would-be land
owners” destroyed the Osage culture. Yet, this came after the French and
Spanish period, and it will be dealt with in later chapters. The contrast in
the economies of the Osages and Western civilization show the potential
conflict of the two. No doubt, both cultures borrowed portions of the
others culture while rejecting other selected portions.

OSAGE RELATIONSHIPS WITH FRANCE
Foreknowledge

No documentation shows any contact between the Euro-Americans and
Osages before they were mentioned at Detroit in 1712. But judging by the
number of grown-up mixed Osages-French during du Tisne’s visit in 1719,
there had been undocumented contacts in the late-1600s. It is probable that
both Coronado and de Soto met separate bands of Osages in the early-
1540s. The surviving descriptions of Osage legends certainly indicate they
did. One of Coronados descriptions fits the Osages better than any other
Indians, and this description was given in sight of the mountains (hills with
blue haze) to the east (the Osage Hills or Flint Hills?) 8 De Soto apparently
met some Osages and mistook them for the Kansas. Long before Radisson
mentioned them in 1659 and Marquette eleven years later, the Osage knew
of the Euro-American presence. It would have been entirely in keeping
with the Osage character if they had remained unseen while observing the
white men.

The Osage watched new developments very carefully. It was their cus¬
tom to learn as much about anything unusual as they could. Once they had
a good assessment of the situation, they formulated a strategy to deal with
it. They had both the horse and horse technology almost as soon as the
Kiowa because they got both from the Kiowa by trade. Since they had a
close alliance with the Illinoian Cahokia and Kaskaskias, it is probable that
they had even traded with Euro-Americans while disguised as Illinois In¬
dians.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

96 / Relationships with Euro-Americans
Contacts with Explorers

By 1712, the Osages were well prepared to meet the French. It is important
to note that they were not identified as Osages until they arrived at Detroit.
In the best account of this battle, we are told the Ottawa and Pottowatomie
met a large war party of Illinois reinforcements. The Osages were a part of
this party, but this fact did not emerge until they arrived at Detroit. 9

Like most Indian wars, this started as bluff war. A group of Maskou-
tin Indians were using bluff war on an Ottawa chief. In retaliation, the
Ottawa and Pottowatomie struck the Maskoutins winter camp in April of
1712. After a three-day battle in which they suffered many casualties, the
Maskoutins retreated to Detroit and joined their Sac and Fox allies. At this
point, the Ottawa and Pottowatomie met the party of Illinois, which in¬
cluded the Osage. With this additional force, the allies (the Osage friends)
struck the Sac and Fox stockade at Detroit. In the sixteen-day battle, the Sac
and Fox side lost about a thousand men, women, and children. This is the
heaviest battle loss to an Indian group that we have found in the records.

Dubuisson, the French commander at Detroit, tried to prevent the battle.
After failing to get cooperation from the Sac and Fox, he threw his support
to the allies. While this turned the Sac and Fox against the French, it
strengthened the French standing among the allied nations. As a note of
interest, from this time the French turned to the south instead of to the
west. This led them to Fort Duquesne (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) at the
Forks of the Ohio, Vincennes at the mouth of the Wabash, Kaskaskia near
the mouth of the Ohio, and Cahokia opposite the mouth of the Missouri
and New Orleans, as well as posts on the Red and Arkansas Rivers.

After the battle at Detroit a young French officer, Entienne Veniard
Bourgmont, deserted his command and went with the Osages to their vil¬
lage in the Bend of the Missouri. Apparently, he lived with a woman of the
Elk clan and had several Osage children. 10 Bourgmont later married a Mis-
souria woman. Upon his return to France, the King not only overlooked his
desertion, but appointed him Commandant of the Missouri. Bourgmont
was promised royal titles if he would do two things. First, he was to con¬
struct a fort on the Missouri and, second, make alliances with the western
nations (Pawnee, Wichita, Kansas). Fort Orleans was built in the Bend of the
Missouri, on the left bank, in the summer of 1723. 11

During 1724, Bourgmont carried out the second part of his mission.
With Osage and Missouria guides, he explored as far west as Salina and
Junction City in Kansas. 12 This greatly added to the knowledge of the
American West that had been accumulated by Western civilization. Upon
his return to the Bend of the Missouri, Bourgmont departed for Paris, tak-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 97

ing some Osages and Missourias with him. Their arrival in Paris, 1725, cre¬
ated a sensational swell of curiosity. Because of this visit and a later visit the
Osages became well known in France.

Before 1725 the relationship between the Osage and the French on the
Missouri was reasonably amicable. However, an incident on the Red River
in 1719 was not as amicable as relationships on the Missouri. The dream of
reaching the western nations, New Mexico, and maybe the Pacific led the
French to a decision. They decided to send Bernard de la Harpe up the Red
River guided by Caddoean scouts.

In the Kiamichi Mountain area of Southeastern Oklahoma, La Harpe
found that it did not pay to bypass the Osages. The reaction of the Caddo
when they met an Osage war party clearly indicated Osage control of the
Red River route. 13 It is evident from the success experienced by Bourg-
mont and the failure of La Harpe that any move to develop a route to the
west must be made with the consent of the Osages.

Although the Osage blockade was effective, there were times when they
failed in their attempts to prevent passage through their territory. Certainly,
Charles Claude du Tisne, in the spring of 1719, managed to proceed to the
west despite Osage objections. 14 Not wishing to lose the profitable French
trade, the Osage allowed du Tisne to proceed with a severely restricted
amount of trade goods instead of killing him. The Mallet Brothers also
slipped through the Osage barrier and reached Santa Fe in 1739. 15 Stung by
these breaches of their blockade, the Osages stiffened their resistance. In the
winter of 1741—1742, Fabry de la Bruyere, who was guided by the Mallets,
attempted to reach Santa Fe. Low water stalled the expedition about one
hundred and fifty miles upstream from the mouth of the Canadian River
in Oklahoma. 16 The Osages harassed the Bruyere party, delaying them and
frustrating their efforts to secure horses. Because of this harassment, Bruyere
could not obtain horses, so he turned back.

To a limited extent, one can judge the effectiveness of the Osage defense
of their territory by the accounts of the chroniclers. Between 1675 and
i860, these accounts, with notable exceptions, describe the Osage with bit¬
terness and in unflattering terms. Their word, their honor, and their achieve¬
ments are cast to fit into the mold of the recorder. This is clearly a case of
“whose ox is being gored.” From the Osage viewpoint, the French, the
Spanish, the Americans, and the emigrant Indian nations were intruders
upon the Osage domain. Naturally, in the defense of their lands and their
rights as protectors of the land, they frustrated the intentions of those who
sought to use the Osages and the Osage domain for their own benefit.

One must bear in mind that those persons writing about the Osages were
mainly frustrated intruders or those who had limited association with the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

98 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Osages. They were seldom impartial observers without any vested interests.
Since the Osages and those who knew them better than anyone else left few
written records, the picture of the Osages hangs unbalanced. It is sad that a
few modern writers parrot this bias by accusing the Osages of being liars,
whiners, treacherous and bloodthirsty. When the evidence is weighed on the
scales of fairness and impartiality, such accusations only serve to show the
Osages outwitted, outfought, and outmaneuvered the “superior” recorders
and their friends. This unwillingness to admit that “wild savages” beat them
at their own game is an effort to fit the Osages into the crass mold of their
own cultural bias.

Accommodation with the French

Antonine Crozat had a monopoly of all trade in French Louisiana between
1712 and 1717. Being unable to finance the development of Louisiana,
Crozat turned his monopoly back to the King. In August of i7i7,John Law
received the monopoly of trade in Louisiana. 17 Law was at least one hundred
years ahead of his time in the field of finance. He was mercantilistic in his
belief that money was wealth. Yet, despite this belief, he issued paper money
based on real wealth such as land and resources. His downfall came when
he resorted to the dangerous practice of issuing watered stock. In effect, this
devalued French currency and caused a collapse of French finance, thereby
retarding the development of Louisiana.

Law’s vigorous efforts to develop his Louisiana trade monopoly caused
the French explorations we mentioned earlier. While the exlorations irri¬
tated the Osage, his colonizing and efforts to stop the slave trade in captured
Caddos more than antagonized them. French-Americans who were on the
scene realized this and continued the slave trade. The colonial settlement
never flourished and a new spirit of working together developed between
the Osage and the French after Law’s “Mississippi Bubble” broke in 1720.
Law’s company was finally abolished in 1731.

While there were irritations between the two cultures, the Osage tem¬
pered their attacks slightly and the French overlooked most of the incidents.
One must carefully distinguish between the official French policy and the
implementation of that policy by those French who were dealing directly
with the Osages. These were two entirely different matters. Officially, any
Indians that did not comply with French policies were to be exterminated.
French realists on the scene realized there was no feasible way the Osages
could be exterminated. They also realized that moves in that direction could
easily lead to their own extermination. Instead, they tried to placate the
Osages and to play down the killing of an occasional Coureurs de hois or
Boheme.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 99

The effectiveness of this realistic policy is shown by the loyalty of the
Osage to the French. Not only did they intermarry with the French, but
they also supported them in the Seven Years War (French and Indian War).
We must explain that in the Osage culture, as in Western civilization, mar¬
riages between the cultures was not considered desirable. It was an extraor¬
dinary gesture on the part of an Osage family to give consent to an Osage-
French marriage. Usually, these were third daughter (Ah sin ka) marriages.
Yet, if the Frenchman was held in great esteem among the Osage, a mar¬
riage with the second daughter (We ha) or more rarely the first daughter (Me
nah ) was permitted. Children of these marriages were accepted as Osage if
they lived by Osage customs and laws. If they did not do this, they were
considered to be “nobodies.” That is, they were beings without bodies, a
nonperson. They could live with the Osage or anywhere they wished, but
they were not considered to be Osage.

French and Indian War

The French and Indian War (Seven Years War) was the last of the wars in the
struggle for colonial empire in North America. France, England, and Spain
fought three other wars before the French and Indian War. In America, these
wars were called King Williams’ War, Queen Anne’s War, and King George s
War. Of these four intercolonial wars, the French and Indian War was the
only one that started in America.

As their first line of defense, the French had built a string of forts from
the Great Lakes to the Forks of the Ohio (see Fig. 16). The Osages were
involved in battles at two of these forts, Niagara on the Great Lakes and
Duquesne at the Forks of the Ohio. The British built a corresponding string
of forts east of the Appalachian Crest. Generally, except for the Iroquois, the
Indian nations—including the Osage nation—supported the French.

General Edward Braddock had been a successful general in the European
wars, but he had no experience in fighting American-style wars. The fact
that there was a difference in the style of warfare in Europe and that of
America clearly shows an Indian influence on the Euro-American culture.
European armies of the 1750s used volley fire as their basic style of firearm
use. Muskets, which were the standard military firearm, had a smooth bore.
Hence, the projectile tended to be erratic. By firing in a series of volleys, the
effect was much like a large shotgun in that a great number of projectiles
were sent toward a target at one time. Although some would miss hitting a
mark, many would strike some mark. These projectiles were lead balls over
one-half of an inch in diameter (.69"). If they struck any part of a human
body, they did a considerable amount of damage.

Indians had little use for muskets in battle since a bowman was more

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

100 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Fig. 16. Notice the concentration of forts along the Ohio headwaters.

accurate and faster than a musketman. A rifle differs from a musket in that
the bore has spiral grooves running the length of the bore. This gives the
projectile a spin which yields pinpoint accuracy. (Fletching on arrows per¬
form the same function.) The rifling also lessens the need for a large projec¬
tile. For bowmen and riflemen, it is more logical to fire from cover than to
fire from an exposed position. Osages and other Indians customarily used
fire in motion. That is, they would fire from cover and immediately move
to another covered position. Thus, the return fire would be directed at the
first position. This had the added advantage of causing the enemy to over¬
estimate the size of the force they were facing.

Braddock was no different from most military commanders of his time,
including George Washington. These commanders clung to the musket and
volley fire because the bow required constant practice and the rifle required
more time to reload as well as a greater skill in its use. Not until the Battle
of New Orleans in 1815—when 126 riflemen, fighting Indian-style, de¬
stroyed two regiments of highlanders—did the armies of Western civiliza-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 101

tion adopt the rifle as a standard military weapon. During World War II, in
the rain forests of the Southwest Pacific, we were taught to use fire in mo¬
tion as if it was a new concept, although it was combined with saturation
fire (a type of volley fire).

Chetoka or Tsi To ka (Whetstone) related that a large war party from his
Little Osage village participated in the Battle of Duquesne. 18 Apparently,
they were supplied with powder and ball at Fort Des Chartres and were
gone about seven months. Most of the party was from the Mottled Eagle
clan. 19 One can almost see Braddock’s army, in their red coats with white
cross belts, forming into lines of four ranks across the glade. At the other end
of the glade, the French regulars stand at the ready in their green coats.
Suddenly, a sword is raised and dropped; volley after volley are exchanged.
The French break ranks and take cover behind the trees. Slowly the red
ranks march across the glade. Then a withering rain of aimed projectiles
strike the British ranks. Again and again the ranks close and fire volleys into
the wooded shadows, yet the British melt away like butter on a hot rock.
The Osages, who admired bravery, took many scalps, for scalps from such
men were greatly honored.

Some Osage stories relate that the Osages went on to Fort Niagara and
there again fought the British. After the defeat of the British at Duquesne
and Niagara, Indians from all over the old Northwest flocked to the aid of
the French. No evidence exists to show that the Osage participated in the
later battles. However, they had aided the French when it was desperately
needed, before other nations allied with the French. Apparently, though, the
Osages used the freedom from conflict with nations on their eastern borders
to expand their southwestern domain and were too busy to render further
aid to the French.

Transition to Spain

Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris, 1763, France ceded all of Louisiana
to Spain. Spain was slow to take over the territory, so the Spanish period
ran from 1765 to 1803, but actual Spanish control was not established until
1769. In the transition period, the French commander at Fort Des Chartres
(mouth of the Kaskaskia River), Louis St. Ange de Bellrive, refused to turn
the fort over to the Spanish. He held it for the British, who took possession
of the fort in May of 1765.

The Osages were intensely loyal to the French. This was evident in an
incident that occurred at Fort Des Chartres while the British were being
installed there. An Osage chief was visiting St. Ange when he saw a British
officer. It took St. Ange and the interpreter’s best efforts to keep the Osage
from tomahawking the British officer. 2 " While their dislike of the British

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

102 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

was intense, the Osages also had a great dislike for the Spanish. They had
experienced direct and indirect encounters with the Spanish earlier—in the
Southwest and in Texas near Natchitoches—and had already formulated a
dislike for them. It is fortunate for the Spanish that most of the French
remained in Louisiana. These French were the ones who traded with the
Osages, although there were a small number of Spanish traders. Osage con¬
tacts with the Spanish were often over some matter involving Osage con¬
flict with Spanish policy. Such meetings had a tendency to cause more mal¬
ice toward the Spaniards.

When the British took possession east of the Mississippi many French
moved west of the Great River. St. Ange moved his soldiers and many resi¬
dents of the nearby village of Kaskaskia to the newly founded St. Louis.
One of these soldiers was Nicholas Royer dit Sansquartier, and one of the
residents of Kaskaskia was Jean Baptiste Janot/Jeanot dit La Chapelle. Both
became the ancestors of many Osage mixed-bloods. 21

The French had introduced trade goods from Western civilization into
the Osage culture. They had intermarried with the Osages and thus estab¬
lished blood ties. As a result, a mutual trust and friendship developed be¬
tween the Osages and the resident French. However, we must in candor note
that the Coureurs de hois and Bohemes were not included in this relationship
by either the Osages or the regular French inhabitants and traders. The
Spanish never grasped this distinction in Osage-French relationships.

IN SEARCH OF ACCOMMODATION WITH SPAIN
Spanish and Osage Character
Spanish Colonizing Policies

Whereas the French official policy toward the Indian was harsh and the
application enlightened, the Spanish official policy was enlightened and the
application was harsh. The Requerimiento is a classical example of the con¬
trast between Spanish policy and Spanish practice. This statement of con¬
ciliation and assurances was a requirement of all first contact between the
Spanish and Indians. It was to be read to the Indians by the Spanish leader
and witnessed by a priest. Too often it was read in whispers among the
Spaniards in the darkness before a dawn attack or, as some reports say, it was
read to the trees around them. 22

Spain used three methods to “civilize” Indians. Perversion of the Re¬
querimiento led to outright enslavement of the Indian or extermination,
which was the first method. A second method was the encomiendo system.
Again, the official intent was to Christianize and “civilize” the Indian. Un¬
der this system, a landowner would agree to “civilize” an Indian in return

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 103

for his labor. However, it more often led to virtual enslavement or peonage.
The final method was the mission system, which was well intentioned, but
it too led to a form of benign peonage. This is why so many Indians oppose
sainthood for Fr. Junipero Serra. The Osages were well aware of these prac¬
tices and wanted no part of them.

Characterizations

Fortunately for the Spaniards, they did not make any serious effort to im¬
plement these practices with the Osages. Insofar as their character and cul¬
ture permitted, they generally tried to continue the former French prac¬
tices. Cervantes’s Don Quixote de la Mancha gives us an excellent insight into
Spanish character and culture.Jose Ortega adds to these insights in his Medi¬
tations on Quixote . 23 More than these great works, the letters exchanged be¬
tween the Spanish Governors and Lieutenant Governors of Louisiana reveal
the Spanish character. They often tilted with the Osage windmill in their
reluctance to face realities. Not once in three printed and bound volumes of
their letters did they mention the unusual size of the Osage. It would seem
that the Spanish ego could not bear to acknowledge that the Osages were a
larger people than themselves.

The Osage, like the Spanish, were a proud people. While they displayed
a generous amount of egotism, this was tempered by a humility that was
absent in the Spaniard. Both peoples were devoted to their religious beliefs.
Osage and Spaniard alike were idealistic in their religion. Possibly the arro¬
gance arising from the confidence in their abilities and successes generated
a friction between the Osage and Spanish. It is amazing how alike many of
their traits were. Yet, the Osages were realists in all cultural matters other
than religion. It was the Osage humility that baffled the Spanish mind. The
frequent switch from arrogance to humility was incomprehensible to the
Spanish. Like most Euro-Americans, the Spanish would have difficulty in
understanding why an Osage would mourn the death of an enemy he had
slain. This contrast in the arrogance of taking a human life and the humility
of mourning for taking the life was at the root of much of the Spanish
distrust of the Osage.

Spanish Failure

Many factors worked against the Spanish in their relationships with the
Osage. Possibly the essential factor was the Spanish viewpoint that the
Osages were rebellious subjects. From the Osage viewpoint, they were
the subjects of no one, and the Spanish intruders were tolerated only as a
means to acquire trade goods. Spanish embargoes of Osage trade caused
punitive Osage responses because they removed the only reason the Osage

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

104 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

tolerated the Spanish. Trade goods destined for other tribes were looted. Af¬
ter one attempt by the Spanish to exterminate them, the Osages’ only re¬
sponse was simply to steal their farm horses. As a result, the Spanish subjects
in the Illinois Country nearly starved to death because they could not raise
their food. Only by lifting the extermination attempt and trading for Osage
food could the Spanish save their toehold in the Illinois District.

Love, fear, and consent are needed to conduct an orderly government. The
most successful governments are those based on love and consent with a
touch of awe growing out of respect. Frederick the Great once became in¬
censed at the bowing and scraping of a servant. He beat the servant with
his cane and angrily shouted, “Love me, don’t fear me!” It seems the Spanish
tried this policy with the Osages and failed. The Osages’fear of losing trade
was the only means the Spanish had to bring the Osages under their rule.
They never had the love and often lost the consent of the Osages. The in¬
ability of the Spanish to enforce an embargo removed any fear of the Span¬
ish on the part of the Osages.

The Fur Trade
Factors in the Trade

Among the various factors affecting the fur trade of mid—America, the
single most important factor was the Osage nation. While this has been
discussed by several authorities, none has stated the role of the Osages better
than Carl H. Chapman.

The Osage Indians were the most important of the tribes living in
the western part of Spanish Illinois [Upper Louisiana] during the
Spanish rule. They played several roles in the unfolding of the histori¬
cal scene in the central Mississippi-Missouri Valley area and the prairies
to the southwest. They were suppliers of hides and furs to St. Louis and
Arkansas Post; they were barriers to overland travel and trade between
the Spanish territory bordering the Mississippi and Missouri rivers
and that of Mexico and New Mexico; they were buffers against the
English during the American Revolution. They were indomitable in
their position of power. 24

It is easy to see why the Osages presented such a problem to the Spanish fur
trade. They were the largest suppliers of furs, and at the same time they were
the greatest barrier to enlarging the fur trade.

The Spaniards introduced two new practices in the fur trade of the
Middle Waters. First, they worked through French fur traders and second
they encouraged Indians from the east side of the Mississippi to move to the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 105

MISSOURI RIVER TRADE, 1775-1776

Number

Trade Goods

Nations

Traders

(value in pounds of furs)

Omaha

5,000

No. Pawnee

1,800

Pawnee

1 ,200

Otoes

4,000

Kansas

7,500

Missouri

4,000

Republican

3,000

Little Osages

7,200

Big Osages

15,000

TOTALS

2 1

48,700

TOTAL OSAGE

22,200

Fig. 17. Notice that almost half of the total trade was with the Osages.

Osage territory and trap furs. 25 French traders were well established in the
trade before the Spanish acquired Louisiana. While some Spaniards, such as
Lisa and Vasquez, entered the trade during the Spanish period, their number
was quite small. A distinction among the traders must be made. Legitimate
traders were respected by the Osages as long as they did not try to trade
with the Indians of the west. Thus, in the absence of a Spanish embargo, fur
trade was allowed to the northwest up the Missouri (see Fig. 17). Other
types of traders were the Coureurs de hois (Runner of the Forest) and Boheme
(vagabond-outcast). These traders ignored the embargoes, which was agree¬
able with the Osages, but when they trapped furs in Osage territory or
traded with the western tribes the Osages killed them. The majority of this
type of trader operated along the Arkansas River.

Emigrant Indians were especially odious to the Osages, because they
knowingly violated Indian custom. Not only did they deplete Osage game
supplies, but they did this under the protection of the despised Spaniard.
Even though the Southeastern Indians disliked the Spanish (as did all the
Indian nations), they were especially adept at feeding the Anglo-American
vanity. The Osages held this practice in great contempt as being unworthy
of an honorable people. This was a view generally held by most peoples of
the Plains who had a tradition of warfare, and it is an important distinction
between the Plains and woodland peoples. We will return to this matter in
a later chapter.

In Spanish Louisiana, there were three fur and hide trading centers. These

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

106 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

were St. Louis in the Illinois district, Arkansas Post in the Arkansas district,
and Natchitoches in the Red River district. 26 Officially all Osage trade was
to be through St. Louis. This was a satisfactory arrangement for the Little
Osage and White Hair bands, but it was not accepted by the Arkansas bands.
In part, it was the search for a convenient trading outlet that unified the
scattered Osage bands that dwelt on the Arkansas drainage. The desire of the
Spanish at Arkansas Post for this share of the Osage trade made the various
embargoes difficult to enforce. Natchitoches was a hide, tallow, horse, and
cattle trading center. Red River residents raised tobacco for sale in New
Orleans and, therefore, had many horses. Horses attracted the Osages like a
magnet.

It is possible that the Spanish might have been able to rigidly enforce an
Osage trade embargo by forcing their traders at Arkansas Post to comply.
However, it is doubtful that this action could have been effective. The
Osages would have supplied themselves with trade goods destined for other
nations. In effect, they would have shut off all Spanish fur trade on the Mis¬
souri, Arkansas, and Red Rivers. Thus, Spain would have been harmed more
than the Osages. The British were a further threat to Spanish embargoes.

The Osages disliked the Spanish, and their dislike of the British was
equally as great. Yet, they would trade with the British if it became neces¬
sary because they were realists in trade. Certainly, the Ducharme incident
showed British interest in the Osage trade. Jean Marie Ducharme and a
party of British traders attempted to trade with the Osages during one of
the many Spanish embargoes. Although the Spanish intercepted and confis¬
cated the boatload of British trade goods, it did not entirely stop the British
from trading with the Osages. 27

No matter how one looks at the Spanish in the Mississippi Valley, one gets
the impression that they were engaging in a holding action. They wanted a
buffer between the British-American settlements and the Mexican prov¬
inces of Texas and New Mexico. However, it seems likely that they wanted
to hold Louisiana for future development as well. The problem was how to
finance the holding period. There can be little doubt that the fur trade was
expected to pay the expenses for financing the administration of Louisiana.
Therefore, we need to examine the value of that trade.

Some idea of the value of the fur trade in the 1775-1776 season can be
gained from the assignment of traders and the amount invested in trade
goods. A total of 97,000 livres was invested in the Missouri trade. 28 If we
take twenty cents as the value of a livre, this would be a total of $19,480
invested in trade goods. Profits usually ranged from 100 percent to 200 per¬
cent of the amount invested in trade goods.

We will take 100 percent as our figure for estimating the value of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 107

the Missouri trade in 1775-1776. On this basis, the Missouri trade would
amount to $1,948,000 and the Osage part of this trade would amount to
$888,000. By applying the same basis to the 1794-1795 season, the amounts
would be $3,500,000 for the total Missouri trade and $1,920,000 for the
Osage trade alone. 29 Clearly, the Osage trade accounted for half or more of
the Missouri trade. No figures are available for the Arkansas trade, but the
Osage portion of this trade would be at least half. These figures are not
impressive in terms of modern dollars. However, it would take more than
twenty modern dollars to equal a dollar value in the late-1700s. The Span¬
ish were excellent administrators and kept passport records. Every trader
was required to have a passport to trade with an Indian nation. A typical
passport listed, first, the name of the Lieutenant Governor issuing the pass¬
port. This was followed by the name(s) of the major leader(s) and the nation
they were authorized to trade with. Then the names of the employees of the
trading party were listed. Bans, such as supplying other traders and trading
with other nations were specified in the passport. The passport was visa
stamped or signed at Fort Missouri (see Fig. 18). 30

The Vasquez Affair

Competition for the Osage trade was nearly as important in the Spanish fur
trade as the value of the Osage trade was in preventing an effective em¬
bargo of the Osages. There were several incidents that illustrate this point,
but none shows the rivalry between St. Louis and Arkansas Post better than
the Vasquez Affair. St. Louis had all the Osage trade, but Arkansas Post
wanted the Osage trade on the Arkansas drainage.

In a letter dated December 29, i786,Jacobo du Breuil, Lieutenant Gov¬
ernor of Arkansas Post, wrote to Governor Estevan Miro about an alleged
story told by Benito Vasquez. 31 We use the term alleged because the story
may or may not have been told by Vasquez. Despite subsequent testimony to
the contrary, the St. Louis trader was capable of such an act. In du Breuils
letter, he claimed that Vasquez had told the Osages that an army was coming
to Arkansas Post to make war on them. Vasquez purportedly warned the
Osages not to go near Arkansas Post or they would be killed. Brucaiguais
or Bro Ki he ka (Chief of All), who was also called Caigues Tuajanga or
Ki he ka Wa ti an ka (Saucy Chief), was from the Tsi shu Peace Maker clan.
Chief of All had signed the Peace Agreement of 1785 but had allegedly
broken it by attacking the Caddo on the Red River. Since the Spanish were
demanding Chief of All as a hostage for this act and the Osages had not
given him to the Spanish, obviously the alleged Vasquez story would be
believed by the Osages.

Since this story came to du Breuil from Francisco Martin, who got it

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

108 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

ASSIGNMENT OF TRADERS, 1794-1795

Nation

Traders

Big

Osage

Cohere, Ceret, Roubidoux, Andre-
ville, Montardy, Dubreiul, Pierre
Chouteau, Papin, Chavin, Sangui-
net, Clamorqan, Boleduc.

1 2

Little Osaqe

Roy, Marie, Lefleur, Pratt.

Kansas

Benito Vasquez, Bernard Sarpy,
Durocher, Zenon Trudeau.

Republican

Auquste Chouteau

Otoes

Reilhe, Laval6.

Pawnee

Yostie

Caddo

Leconte

Loups

Labadie

Omaha

Vincenes, St. Sire, Hubardau.

Fig. 18. Several Osage mixed-blood families have ancestors among these traders.

from Chief Cogisiguedes or Ko ke Se ke tagra (Approaching Foot Sounds),
one may suspect that the Osages could have “planted” the story. This would
be a typical Osage tactic to confuse an enemy and to take the pressure off
themselves. Approaching Foot Sounds had agreed to turn Chief of All over
to Francisco Martin, but he had slipped away from him near Arkansas Post.
A Quapaw woman told du Breuil that the Osages feared they would be
seized and burned if they surrendered. This also suggests an Osage hand in
the origin of the story. The Quapaw would look upon their part as a joke
on the disliked Spaniard. Such “inside jokes” were dear to the Indian heart.

Francisco Cruzat, Lieutenant Governor at St. Louis, set about refuting the
story when Governor Miro asked him to investigate the Vasquez Affair. In a
letter dated July 29,1787, Cruzat reported his findings to Governor Miro. 32
Cruzat points out that the testimony, under oath, of the traders who were
with Vasquez, denies any knowledge of such a seditious story. He further
points out that Chief of All and Approaching Foot Sounds had departed
from Claremore Is village (Halley’s Bluff in Vernon County, Missouri) be¬
fore Vasquez had arrived there. As a further note, he adds that Martin was
noted for bearing unreliable tales. Cruzat’s astuteness is revealed when he
attributes the origin of the story to the Osages.

Any one of the three parties involved—the St. Louis traders, du Breuil,
or the Osages—could have started the story. However, we agree with Cruzat
and attribute the story to Osage tactics. Regardless of who originated the
story, the Vasquez Affair shows the maneuvering going on in the Spanish fur

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 109

trade. This three way action, combined with the threat of British entry into
the Osage trade, caused the failure of the Spanish embargoes against the
Osages. As a result, the Spanish never brought the Osages under their rule.

Three of the traders who gave testimony in the Vasquez Affair left de¬
scendants among the Osages. One of these was Santiago Chovin/Chavin,
who was a native of New Orleans and was forty-five years old in June
of 1787. Another was Carlos Tayon who used the dit names of Michel,
St. Michel, and Mikles among the Osages. He was a native of the Illinois
country and in June of 1787 he was twenty-seven years old. A final attester
was Josef Rivar (or Joseph Revard), who was a native of Three Rivers,
Canada, and in June of 1787 was fifty-two years old. This Joseph Revard
was a direct lineal ancestor of Major General C. L. Tinker on the mater¬
nal side.

The Problem People
Conflict of Objectives

Spain had a serious conflict in objectives between the Red River district of
Louisiana and the Texas district of Mexico. To preserve the buffer status of
Louisiana, it was necessary to promote trade. While this placed Louisiana as
a buffer between the British-Americans and the Mexican districts of Texas
and New Mexico, it placed firearms into the hands of the Lipan Apache and
Comanche. Thus, the Texas and New Mexico districts could not bring these
nations under their control.

The Osages were fighting the Comanche and Lipan Apache on their
western and southwestern borders and were aware of their source of fire¬
arms. Their incessant raids on Natchitoches served two purposes: it supplied
them with horses, and it hampered the trade with the Lipan Apache. While
these raids harmed the development of trade in the Red River district, they
tended to aid the Texas and New Mexico districts. Thus, these districts were
able to put a more effective force in the field against the Comanche and
Lipan Apache. This is exactly what the Osages wanted, for it placed the
Comanche and Apache between two opposing forces.

Under Governor Francisco Hector Carondelet, Natchitoches suffered the
loss of most of its tobacco market. This created a large number of traders
who had been tobacco producers. These traders were unlicensed and scat¬
tered, so it was difficult to supervise them. While some of these former
tobacco raisers traded with the Osages, the others either traded into Texas
or directly with the Cheyenne, Comanche, and Lipan Apache. This aroused
the Osages, and many traders were killed. The Osages could not allow this
trade to undermine their own trade.

St. Louis was rapidly becoming the gateway to the West while Natchi-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

110 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

toches was withering under conflicting policies and Osage attacks. The
Osages had no particular interest at stake on the northern reaches of the
Missouri. So long as they had a sufficient supply of trade goods, they al¬
lowed the Upper Missouri trade to proceed without molestation. However,
trade that involved their western and southwestern territory was certain to
attract their opposition. Pedro Vial arrived in St. Louis on October 6, 1792,
from Santa Fe, New Mexico. He confidently stated that the road to Santa
Fe was open, and it could be reached in twenty-five days. 33 Vial did not
consider the objectives of the Osages, so his road to Santa Fe did not be¬
come a reality until thirty-three years later, in 1825.

The development of a Missouri route to the Pacific was progressing very
well, and the Spanish might have been able to reach the Pacific by this route
if they had not insisted on placing embargoes on the Osages. These on again,
off again embargoes led to intermittent blockades of the Missouri River by
the Osages, which prevented any consistent, sustained efforts to reach the
Pacific via the Missouri. Jefferson was aware of these problems before he
sent Lewis and Clark on their expedition. The Lewis and Clark Expedition
was successful because it was a large brigade, the largest to ascend the Mis¬
souri up to that time. Jefferson’s idea was to send a party so large that even
the Osages could not stop it. This idea did not escape the St. Louis fur trad¬
ers, as the larger fur brigades after the expedition show. It is worth observing
that half of the original Lewis and Clark Expedition was sent back when
they reached the Mandan villages.

The message from the Osages to the Spanish was clearly trade with us
but do not trade with our enemies. Apparently, the Spanish either did not
interpret the message correctly or they chose to ignore it. We believe the
Spanish ascribed the Osages’ acts of opposition to being willful acts of an
ignorant savage people. We doubt, however, that their response would have
been much different if they had fully realized why the Osages opposed
them. Both the Osages and the Spaniards had objectives in the West. The
Osages attained a portion of their objectives, but Spain failed in her ambi¬
tions. Spain became so embroiled in trying to subdue the Osages that she
neglected other problems and more important objectives. The Osages, Co¬
manche, and Lipan Apache dealt Spain more problems than any other Indi¬
ans the Spaniards had intercourse with in North America.

Danger of War

The Little Osages in the Bend of the Missouri had aroused Spanish anger
by killing five hunters in the spring of 1772 on the St. Francis and Arkansas
Rivers. Then to add insult to injury the Big Osages killed three hunters and
made captives of two more. From the Spanish viewpoint these acts were

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 111

a “lack of cooperation, . . . hostile attitude, overbearing procedure, and . . .
failure to keep peace or submit to reason.” 34 No consideration was given to
the Osage viewpoint that these poachers were violating Osage territorial
rights. Not only were they poaching game food, but they were, in effect,
stealing trade furs and thus depriving the Osages of the trade benefits.

The Osages were an orderly people, and they did not take to violent ac¬
tions without good reasons. The poaching and stealing activities far ex¬
ceeded the consent of the Osages. The consent or permission given by the
Osages to Euro-Americans was for the establishment of trading facilities
but no more. The Euro-American view that the Osages were subject to their
rule and that they had no title to unoccupied territory was never accepted
by the Osages in the French or Spanish period. Yet, the Spaniards proceeded
as if, in fact, they were masters of the Osages and Osage territory

Given the cultural yardstick of Spanish standards and the conflicting
standards of the Osage culture, it is easy to see why the Spaniards were so
angry with the Osages. Equally clear is the reason why the Spanish never
really reached an accommodation with the Osages. Lacking the financial
means and military force to impose their rule upon the Osages, their only
viable recourse was to accept the situation and adjust to it. The French, as
realists, had adjusted to the situation. Elowever, the idealistic Spanish were
so dedicated to their concept of how things should be that they could not
adjust to the situation that prevailed. In the poker game of Louisiana, Spain
held one ace and six losers; she discarded her ace and held losers against the
Osage nation s full house.

Between 1782 and 1791 the major thrust of Osage actions was centered
on the Caddos, Kichais, Pawnee, and Arkansas Post. 35 However, this is not to
say that no actions occurred elsewhere in the Osage empire. The Mississippi
settlements, the Missouri area, and Natchitoches also felt the Osage pres¬
ence. In March of 1785, a conference was held at New Orleans between the
chiefs of the Arkansas Osages and the Caddos. “A peace was agreed upon
but quickly broken by the Osages who, without provocation, attacked the
Caddos and Kichais.” 36

Although this account does not tell where the fight took place, it does
relate that the Caddos and Kichais were returning from a hunt. The Osages
would not have attacked these people unless they had hunted in Osage ter¬
ritory. Thus, it was the Caddos and Kichais who broke the peace agreement.
Since the Spanish did not recognize hunting territory rights, they consid¬
ered the attack as an unprovoked violation of the agreement. The Caddo
were well aware they had violated Indian law and the spirit of the agree¬
ment. They sought revenge on the Osages and hoped to acquire Osage
hunting rights by claiming the attack had no provocation.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

112 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Fig. 19. Notice that the Osage Domain was only slightly smaller than the Old North¬
west. Practically all the nations around the Osages warred against them to acquire
Osage lands.

The Spanish, acting on misconceptions they were all too willing to ac¬
cept, placed another embargo on Osage trade and encouraged Indian na¬
tions to the north, south, and east of the Osages to make war on them.
Councils were held where powder and ball were distributed, but the Span¬
ish Indian allies had a realistic view toward the Osages and only a few token
raids were made by them. These raids were not large enough to use up the
powder and ball (see Fig. 19).

As a result of these Spanish actions, the Osages showed their naked
power. In 1789, they struck the Kichais near Natchitoches and forced them
to move nearer to the Little Caddos. Earlier in 1788, they had forced the
Great Caddos to seek safety among the Little Caddos. Undoubtedly, there

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 113

were seizures of trade goods and illegal trading going on all through this
period. The Spanish were becoming alarmed, and with more than a little
justification because the Osages were without a doubt considering forcing
them out. Spanish actions had weakened the restraint of the Little Old Men.
It took all their waning power to restrain the band chiefs. Fortunately for
the Spanish, the desire for trade goods outweighed the Osage hatred for the
E spa lo (Spaniard).

The Spanish wanted to exterminate the Osages but the cost, which had
been estimated at twenty thousand pesos without any guarantee of success,
caused them to temper their desire. 37 At the close of 1791, no solution had
been found for the Osage problem, and it had now become more critical
than it had been in 1782 at the beginning of Governor Miro’s administra¬
tion. Nerves were wearing thin under the constant threat of Osage attacks.
In a fit of childlike frustration a Spanish Commandant on the Arkansas
wrote, “It is cruel that a nation so cowardly, of so little consequence, and an
enemy of nearly all its neighbors, does us so much wrong and deprives the
province of the immense resources that it might withdraw from the lands
where they claim to dominate. This nation would not long exist if the
Caddo, their irreconcilable enemy, and the Arkansas were aided.’’ 3 * While
this statement has the usual lies about the Osages, it does reveal the Span¬
ish blindness to reality. They were aware of Osage territorial domination
but refused to admit it. Idealism again shows in the dream that the Caddo
and Quapaw could overpower the Osages. Over the previous century, the
Osages had so completely defeated and demoralized the Caddo that they
were useless as an effective fighting force against them. The Quapaw were
a kindred people to the Osages. While they and the Osages often warred
against each other, neither wore black paint in these clashes. Their conflicts
were more of a family spat than war. It was advantageous for the Quapaws
to make the Spaniard believe they would war on the Osages. Both the
Osages and Quapaw knew that Quapaw thrusts into Osage territory were
moves to convince the Spaniard that they were enemies of the Osages.

From Uneasy Peace to War

The American Revolution created a threat to the Spanish in Louisiana. Due
to the immediate need to deal with this threat, the Spanish put Osage mat¬
ters in the back of their minds. Therefore, an uneasy peace prevailed be¬
tween the Osage nation and Spain between 1775 and 1782. While this pe¬
riod of peace had conflicts and counter conflicts, these were not as severe as
they became in the period between 1782 and 1794.

Shifting powers on the east bank of the Mississippi had no immediate
effect on the Osage or the Spanish. However, as more and more American

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

114 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

settlers moved west along the Ohio and Tennessee Rivers, their presence
created a threat to both. The British were trying to trap out and trade foi-
as many furs as possible in the northern part of the Old Northwest. This was
eventually ended by the War of 1812. Yet before that time, the British ex¬
erted a growing influence in the Old Northwest (the area between the
Ohio and Great Lakes, west to the Mississippi) and northern Louisiana.
Without any doubt, the Osages participated to a limited extent in this
growing trade.

Spanish administration in Louisiana always labored under a shortage of
adequate funds and military force. The American Revolution forced the
Spanish to realize how vulnerable they were without Indian allies. They, like
other Euro-American powers, sought to use Indians as pawns in the struggle
to keep their colonial empire. What the Spanish (and, for that matter, all
the Euro-American governments) did not take into consideration was the
aims and needs of the Indians. Euro-Americans always did, and still do, tend
to consider all Indians to be the same, and, therefore, they established a uni¬
form policy toward the Indian nations. This always has been and still is a
mistake, because Indians differ greatly and no single uniform policy can
ever solve Indian-related problems.

It was Spanish policy to use the Southeastern nations as a buffer between
the Americans and the Floridas (East and West Florida) as well as the lower
Mississippi. This policy suited the Osages since the Spanish discontinued the
practice of encouraging the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Chickasaw to move to
the west side of the Mississippi. This was to keep them available east of the
Mississippi. Spanish policy demanded that the Indian nations west of the
Mississippi act as a bulwark against the Americans on the east and the British
on the north. However, in order for them to be an effective force they had
to bring about peace among the western Indian nations. Unfortunately for
the Spanish and possibly for themselves, the Osages blocked these Spanish
efforts to bring about peace.

It was not the intent of Osage policy to block the Spanish peace efforts.
Their policy was to protect their land, and in doing this they upset Spanish
plans. Osage religion, custom, and practice all dictated that intruders who
hunted in Osage territory without permission must be killed. In a long
letter from du Breuil of Arkansas Post to Governor Cruzat in October of
1786, amid a long list of so-called atrocities committed by the Osages and
plans to wage war against them with Osage enemies, a revealing remark is
made. “They [the Osage enemies] promise good support to the Caddo im¬
mediately upon the withdrawal of the hunters of this district who are scat¬
tered on the branches of this river.” 39 Since the compaction of so many
nations south of the Arkansas made game scarce on that side, it is clear that

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 115

the hunters were on the north side in Osage territory. Failure to recog¬
nize these acts as provocations of Osage rights doomed the Spanish peace¬
keeping gestures. Under the Biblical injunction, “If thine eye offends thee,
pluck it out,” the Spanish tried to exterminate the Osages.

Osage Response

As the Spanish drew closer to openly declaring a war of extermination
against them, the Osages responded to the embargoes and the sending of
other Indians to war on them. The Spanish paid dearly for fumbling the
matter of Osage relationships. Throughout the Spanish period, the Osages
continued to kill Spanish subjects. We place the burden of blame for these
acts of the Osage at the Spaniards' doorstep because they were supposedly
the more civilized and advanced of the two sides, as well as being the in¬
truder.

Osage actions in the south and southwest were as follows: Five traders
killed on the Washita River; seven Frenchmen killed near Arkansas Post; a
hunter killed on the Arkansas near the mouth of the Poteau; four French¬
men killed on the Poteau; trappers robbed above the Poteau; three French¬
men killed and robbed near Natchitoches; and two Frenchmen killed in the
Pawnee country. 40 Santiago Traver, a hunter, was killed on the Arkansas and
three others robbed on the White River. 41 Baptiste Le Due, a creole, was
killed on the Arkansas. 42 This Le Due was either a mixed-blood Osage or
married to an Osage. In either case, he was considered to be a traitor by the
Osages.

Actions around Natchitoches were especially alarming to the Spanish. By
the spring of 1788, the Osages were attacking near the outlying cattle
ranches of Natchitoches. 43 From Quachita (French spelling for the Osage
Wa she Ta [Fat Deer]), which was a post up the Red River from Natchito¬
ches, four more killings and beheadings were reported. 44 The Osage pres¬
sure on the Caddoean peoples became so great that the Tonkawa, Tawakoni,
Kichai, and Yscanis relocated near San Antonio, Texas. 43 Bodies of two men
and a woman were found within sixty leagues (180 miles) of Natchitoches,
and their deaths were attributed to the Osages. 46 Letters reporting these in¬
cidents were bitter in their views of the Osages.

Osage responses were not limited to the Arkansas, Red, and Washita Riv¬
ers. The Mississippi settlements also felt the Osage presence. Ste. Genevieve
was the subject of several Osage raids, but other areas were also affected.
Settlers were attacked on Canteen Creek, twelve miles north of St. Louis.
A man and a boy were killed on the Meremec. 47 Citizens of Ste. Genevieve
complained that the Little Osages had struck their villages for seven or eight
consecutive years and that they no longer had horses enough to till their

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

116 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

fields. 48 The house of Sieur Gratiot was looted by the Big Osages only six
miles from St. Louis. At this same time, the Little Osages killed and be¬
headed a hunter near Ste. Genevieve. 49 Manuel Perez, Lieutenant Governor
at St. Louis, reported horses stolen by the Little Osages at St. Louis and
Ste. Genevieve. 50

These are only a small sample of Osage responses that have been docu¬
mented. Undoubtedly, only a fraction of the incidents were reported in the
existing documents. We omitted most of the incidents involving Indians
friendly with the Spanish. Interestingly, in the Illinois district (St. Louis to
Ste. Genevieve) very few Euro-Americans were killed. In each isolated case,
they were hunting and had been beheaded. This district experienced looting
and horse stealing but very few killings. Evidently, it was the Osage intent
to harass but not kill in this district. Since they did not trade on the Arkan¬
sas, that area experienced more killing of Euro-Americans.

The contrast between the Illinois district and the Arkansas-Natchitoches
districts show a favorable treatment to the Illinois district. Since Osage trade
goods came through the Illinois district, the Osages did not want to be too
severe in their actions in this district. Thus, they employed harassing actions
that inflicted economic hardships on the inhabitants and would somewhat
demoralize the settlers. These were strategies the Osages had used for cen¬
turies and apparently they worked against the Euro-Americans as well as
they did against Indians.

Arkansas and Red River districts did not share in the Osage trade mo¬
nopoly held by the Illinois district. Thus, the Osage restraint against killing
Euro-Americans in the Illinois district did not apply to these two districts.
However, in truth, there were more free or independent hunters and trappers
in the Arkansas and Natchitoches districts than in the Illinois district. This
fact meant that Osage hunting rights would be more frequently violated in
these districts. For this reason, more Euro-Americans would pay for these
violations by losing their lives.

One other factor contributed to the contrast between the treatment of
the Illinois district and the other two districts. The Little Osage and Osage
River Big Osages were conducting the campaign in the Illinois district. It
was the Arkansas bands who conducted the campaign in the southern and
southwestern districts. The Little Osages had primarily three war clans: the
Mottled Eagle, Men of Mystery, and Buffalo Bull. These were secondary
war clans and as such favored the harassment strategy over killing. Big
Osages on the Osage River also had many people in secondary war clans.
However, they also had the two Division Chiefs whose duty it was to keep
the peace. In the late-iyoos this condition changed with the Earth Division
going to the Arkansas bands.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 117

While the Arkansas bands had some people who were members of sec¬
ondary war clans, the majority were members of the Bear and Panther clans,
the two leading war clans of the Osage people. Thus, in general, killing took
precedence over harassment in their campaigns. To say that the leading war
clans always preferred killing or that secondary war clans always chose har¬
assment would be misleading. We are indicating tendencies instead of abso¬
lute preferences.

It seems that these three factors—trade consideration, independent hunt¬
ing and trapping, and the distribution of war clans—caused a difference in
Osage actions in the three districts. A historian must seek cause and effect
relationships and interpret their significance as clearly as possible. Appar¬
ently, the Osages were telling the Spanish, we approve your presence for
trade purposes, but we forbid hunting and trapping by intruders in our ter¬
ritory. Evidently, the Spanish were telling the Osages, you are rebellious
subjects and if you do not keep the peace we will exterminate you. The
conflict in these messages is obvious. It was time for the Spanish to “put up
or shut up.”

The Osage-Spanish War
Petitions and Speeches

Most of the agitation for war against the Osages came from Arkansas Post
and Natchitoches. This is understandable because they had been hardest hit
by Osage actions. The St. Louis traders stood to lose a rich fur trade if Spain
went to war against the Osages. Neither Arkansas Post nor Natchitoches
legally shared in the Osage trade, so they had little to risk and much to gain
if the war subdued the Osages. These posts wanted a share of the Osage
trade, but they wanted even more to be able to trade with other Indians in
peace.

A petition of hunters and inhabitants of Arkansas Post dated May 8,
1789, is an example of many pleas for an Osage war. 51 This petition was
signed by twenty Euro-Americans who asked for permission and help to
make war on the Osages. Obviously, the post was suffering from poverty
due to Osage depredations against them. The signers were in an excellent
position to know they had absolutely no chance to inflict any significant
harm to the Osage. To be candid, this seems more of a ploy to secure relief
from poverty than a sincere desire to go to war against the Osages, and it is
the first time in Osage history we have noted this ploy being used. In the
American period, the American intruders developed this device to a fine art
form with more creative variations.

Realizing that embargo hurt themselves more than the Osages and only
brought an increase of Osage attacks, the Spanish were constantly seeking

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

118 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

other means to subjugate the people. On October 8, 1789, Perez wrote to
Governor Miro about actions he was taking. 52 Perez was demanding that
the Osages deliver to him the Indian that had killed a Euro-American. Fur¬
thermore, when they delivered the accused, the Osages were to execute the
Indian in Perez’s presence. We give Perez an “E” for effort, but he must have
known that in 1789 no Osage would be turned over to the Spanish for
execution. Positively, an Osage would not kill another Osage for the Span¬
ish, because his own life would be forfeited upon his return home. Perez
was sure the Osages would not comply with this demand, although the
Quapaw had earlier met such a requirement. As an alternative, he planned
to seize an Osage chief as a hostage. 53

Perez included a copy of the letter he had sent to the Osages so the Gov¬
ernor could see what he had written. It is interesting that Perez opens his
letter with a reference to the blue sky. Either Perez or an advisor had some
knowledge of Osage customs. The clear blue of a cloudless day, in the Osage
idiom, meant peace and a long life. His concluding paragraph was not men¬
tioned in his cover letter to Governor Miro. In this paragraph, Perez threat¬
ened the Osages with an embargo, encouraged other Indians to attack them,
and threatened an attack from all sides.

Osage reaction to the Perez demands was typical: they ignored them. On
March 7, 1790, Perez wrote that no chiefs had made an appearance. 54 He
reported that there had been a heated discussion of the matter among the
Osages and then it was dropped. Perez probably suspected that the discussion
was about the question of making war on the Spanish instead of about
whether to meet his demands or not. He immediately points out how
powerful the Osages are and the need to temporize. Also, he points to the
need for tact since the available force permitted little else. The Osages were
a proud people and the insult Perez had sent in his letter to them was certain
to inflame their war spirit. Perez had a better comprehension of the Osage
problem than most of the Spanish officials in the Mississippi Valley. However,
it seems he had received some sound advice from the French traders at
St. Louis. He was in the midst of some of the most astute Frenchmen in the
American Fur Trade, the ones who had made St. Louis the gateway to the
West. These men had created the spirit of St. Louis, and Perez was deeply
influenced by this spirit.

Problems of Fighting the Osages

One of the major problems plaguing the Spanish was the problem of popu¬
lation. If we are to believe later records, the Osage population was between
8,000 and 10,000 people. The Osages all through the first half of the 1800s
claimed their population had remained at these levels despite conflicts in the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 119

French, Spanish, and American periods. We believe the Spanish consistently
underestimated the Osage fighting force as being from 700 to 1,200 men.
We would estimate that to 1850 the Osages had at least two thousand
prime-age warriors and could field another 1,000 young and aged warriors,
although they would be less effective than the prime-age men. Most Osage
women were skilled in the use of the bow and constituted a reserve force.
The remaining elderly and very young had some fighting potential, as they
demonstrated against the Cherokee in the so-called Battle of Claremore’s
Mound. If we take the minimum figure of eight thousand people, the
Osages were indeed a formidable force.

By comparison, a census of Louisiana taken in the fall of 1771 shows a
total male Euro-American population of 1,507. The total population includ¬
ing women and slaves totaled 11,344. 55 Since male Euro-American popula¬
tion figures include all ages, it is doubtful if the Spanish could muster more
than 800 to 1,000 effective white male fighters. They would be facing at
least 1,200 to 2,000 fighters trained from childhood and seasoned in actual
combat. It is doubtful if this pitifully small Euro-American force could have
stood up in combat with the Osage secondary force of old warriors and
young boys.

The Spanish realized they could not rely on their available Euro-American
manpower. However, they hoped against their misgivings that they could
entice their Indian allies to attack the Osage. This was not feasible for many
reasons, not the least of them the general Indian dislike of the Spaniard. We
have mentioned that the Spaniards had forced the Quapaw to give up one
of their people and slay him in Spanish presence. Such acts may satisfy one’s
thirst for power, but it surely would not generate any great love for the
Spanish in Quapaw hearts. The Caddoean peoples had been thoroughly de¬
moralized by the Osages for over a hundred years. They held the Osages in
such awe that they were useless to the Spanish in an Osage war.

The Indian nations east of the Mississippi, impacted by the advanc¬
ing American frontier, thirsted for Osage lands or, more accurately, the
game upon the land. However, the Spanish did not offer them land or
game, only powder and ball. Even the offer of land would probably not have
been enough to induce these Indians to plunge deeply into the Osage
homeland—they were not that crazy. It was one matter to ambush a small
Osage hunting party and quite another to face a large Osage war party on
their own ground.

It was not possible for the Spanish to realize the impossibility of getting
a unified strike from Indians. Many Indian leaders from time to time have
tried to unify Indian nations against Euro-Americans, and all have failed. In
recorded history, Indian unification has always failed, and for one reason

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

120 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Population

of Louisiana, 1771

District

Whites

Free

Colored

Total

Colored

Slaves

N. Orleans

1 034

769

568

720

3190

Della

229

200

838

773

2098

Alemanes

704

564

428

312

2016

Acadia

268

218

1 6

522

Cortada

284

264

548

Nalchito-

ches & Ra-

pide

291

227

1 99

165

882

Atacapas

& Opelusas

255

1 89

1 12

631

Iberville

1 54

123

277

Arkansas

St. Louis

251

1 22

497

Ste. Gene-

vieve

212

1 20

1 68

107

605

Totals

3714

2826

1 03

2414

2225

11 344

'Colorec

persons include Negroes, Mulattos,

and Indians.

NOTE: There was

a loss of 250 people between the enumera-

tion and the completion of the table above.

Source is the same as

in 55.

Fig. 20. This table shows how few non-Indians there were in Louisiana. The available
men for an army would have been less than 1,000 able-bodied men.

above all others. Indians differ too greatly from nation to nation. Each na¬
tion has its own customs, its own goals, its own thought patterns, and its
own experiences. 56

The Spanish experience in trying to use Indian allies to exterminate the
Osages follows a classical pattern: speeches are made that promise support
against the despised enemy; some token raids are made; powder and ball are
issued, and the support fades away. Each of the nations had their own motive
for not warring on the Osages. We have merely listed a few to show why
the Spanish were doomed to failure in a war with the Osage.

While population alone would defeat the Spanish, there were other fac¬
tors against them. The terrain and vegetation would have insured the defeat
of an army ten times larger than the Spanish dreamed about. If this were
not enough, the supply line ratio, that is, an extended vulnerable supply
line versus a compact defensible line of supply, would have made the Span¬
ish invasion position untenable. All the advantages favored the Osage—the
Spanish held only one remote advantage. They could have placed a Spanish
army from Cuba or from all their American colonies in the field, but we fear

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 121

such a Spanish army would have met Braddocks fate or destruction such
as General St. Clairs army. Withdrawal of enough troops to decisively de¬
feat the Osages would have left the Spanish colonies open to attack by the
French or English. Spain could have poured enough troops into St. Louis to
defeat the Osage, but it would have been the most expensive piece of real
estate they ever acquired in terms of lost manpower, money, and territory.

Francisco Cruzat gives us some idea of what an Osage warrior could
do. 37 La Balafre (The Scar), a Little Osage chief, was seized as a hostage
while visiting St. Louis, supposedly under a flag of truce. A few days after
his treacherous seizure, phrased as an arrest, The Scar tried to escape. It
took the entire garrison to restrain him. Cruzat writes in awe of “the fury,
wrath, and blind animosity with which he opposed his arrest.” 58 Cruzat’s
awe grows as he relates that forty days after his imprisonment The Scar
again tried to escape: “Various inhabitants bear witness to his furious de¬
lirium. It became impossible to lay hold of him without injuring him be¬
cause he was like a mad dog foaming at the mouth. With the greatest bar¬
barity he attacked anybody who came near to him, like a desperate person
who looks not to his life. Finally it was possible to tie him, although he was
a man of superior strength.” 59 The Scar evidently killed himself in his cell
or died of wounds he received in trying to escape. This is why it was im¬
possible to enslave adult Osages—their liberty was so dear to them that they
chose death over slavery.

Osages were famous for their fury and a complete disregard for their lives
in combat. It was these traits as well as their size and strength that awed all
who fought them. Speaking from our own observation, when angered, an
Osage feels no pain and his strength is greatly magnified. Cruzat s account
is the only known record of the Spaniard witnessing an Osage warrior in
action. They were fortunate The Scar was unarmed. It had taken the entire
St. Louis garrison to subdue one unarmed Osage warrior and the Spanish
were preparing to go to war against 1,200-2,000 armed Osage warriors.
There can be little doubt that the Spanish would have suffered a terrible
defeat in an actual physical war with the Osages. As matters evolved, though,
they did not emerge very well in the paper war either but maybe with a less
evident defeat.

The Paper War

Indian Attacks Against the Osages

Between September of 1789 and April of 1792, the Spanish reported three
attacks upon the Osages by other Indians. The first of these was in the fall
of 1789 against a small Osage village at the Grand Saline east of Claremore,
Oklahoma. It should be remembered that all able-bodied males and females

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

122 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

were out on the Plains on the fall hunt. The outlying Osage village con¬
tained only the infirm and very young children.

Louis de Blanc of Natchitoches gleefully reported to Governor Miro the
details of this victory over the Osages: “I must tell Your Lordship that the
Comanche, Tawehash, Wichita, Yscanis, and Tawakoni formed an army of
700 warriors and went to fall upon the Osage, with all the success that
might be expected. This advantage has encouraged them to such an extent
that in the spring of the coming year they intend to collect many more to
enter the Osage village itself.” 60

It is notable that even with an army of seven hundred able-bodied war¬
riors, who knew they faced only the aged and infants, that they chose to
attack a small outlying Osage village. These “great warriors” did not have
the courage to face the one hundred aged and infirm Osage warriors in the
main village. Another fact, never mentioned by the Spanish, is that they
never tried another invasion. It is possible that the old Osages in the small
outlying village inflicted heavy losses on the invading force. The “coura¬
geous warriors” certainly did not want to run into a small rearguard force
of able-bodied Osage warriors who might be left as protectors the follow¬
ing hunting season.

Joseph Valliere at Arkansas Post reported another Indian attack on the
Osages in April of 1790. 61 Seven Mascou (probably Muskogee) and two
Euro-Americans managed to surprise six Osages. They killed five Osages in
the surprise attack and later killed the Osage they had captured. Such raids
were common on the fringes of Osage territory. In the overall picture, the
Osages probably won more of these clashes than they lost, or the Spanish
would have reported more victories.

In April of 1792, Manuel Perez at St. Louis reported a Sac raid on the
Osages to Governor Miro: 62 “A party of Sauk [Sac] who went to fight the
Osage succeeded in killing three men and taking two prisoners. Another
party of the same nation of the Sauk has gone to war against the Osage.
There is no doubt that, if the Sauk, Renard [Fox], and Kickapoo wish to
continue making war on the Osage, they will succeed in terrorizing them
and cause them to come to reason without any necessity for us to become
implicated in a war with them which might be very prejudicial to the
country on account of its present situation.”

We doubt that the Osages were ever terrorized by the Sac or Fox, al¬
though they had a healthy respect for them. However, Perez was absolutely
right in regard to the Sac, Fox, and Kickapoo ability to cause the Osages
great concern. In 1792, the Osages stood in the greatest danger on their
northeast border, and they knew it. Perez had evidently reached this same
conclusion, but he had some doubts that the Sac and Fox would choose to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 123

push hard enough to effectively weaken the Osage. In the end, the north¬
eastern nations decided to make a stand against the Americans rather than
push against the Osage.

The Osages may have looked upon the Caddos as an overawed people,
the Quapaw as a kindred but weaker people, and the Southeastern nations
with contempt, but they respected the northeastern people. One old Osage,
in commenting on the fighting abilities of the short-legged Delaware, said,
“Him fight like hell, him can’t run.” While the old warriors eyes had a
twinkle, one knew he said this as a tribute. Stories among the Osages clearly
show they respected the fighting abilities of the Sac, Fox, Pottowatomie,
Kickapoo, Delaware, and Illinois.

There was enough concern among the Osages about a possible invasion
of Sac and Fox in 1792 that they took an unprecedented step. They asked
the Kansas nation to help them stop what they thought was an impending
invasion. Although it was also advantageous to the Kansas to halt the Sac and
Fox advance, for reasons of their own they refused. From that time to the
present, the Osages have applied the archaic Dhegiha word, Kaw, to the
Kansas. At that time, the word meant coward. One must consider that in
1792, the oldest sister (Me na, the oldest sister was always the prize) of
Claremore I and White Hair I had just married White Plume, who was the
leading Kansas chief. Therefore, there was a supposed alliance between the
Osage and Kaw because of this marriage.

Plans

In January of 1790, Louis de Blanc of Natchitoches proposed that the Gov¬
ernor commission him to lead a party against the Osages at his own ex¬
pense. 63 During the spring of 1791 a meeting of the Chickasaw, Mascouten,
Cherokee, Shawnee, Abenaki, and Saulk was to be held. This council of na¬
tions was to reach an agreement to make war on the Osages. 64 In March of
1792, Perez at St. Louis reported that the Big Osages had seized trade goods
destined for the Kaws. He added that the traders were not harmed and that
the Osages promised full value for the goods. The traders said the Osages
would continue this practice unless traders were sent to them. Perez care¬
fully points out that if all Missouri trade is cut off, the entire trade would
be lost to the British. 65

A new team of Spanish administrators appeared in the early 1790s. Gov¬
ernor Estevan Miro was replaced by Hector Carondelet, Lieutenant Gover¬
nor Manuel Perez was replaced at St. Louis by Zenon Trudeau, and Ignacio
Delino was installed at Arkansas Post. Trudeau, being French by birth, was
probably more knowledgeable about the Osages than the other new admin¬
istrators. These new officials followed the same pattern as their predecessors.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

124 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Thus a new round of embargoes and threats against the Osage followed the
appointment of these Spanish leaders.

Carondelet wrote to Delino in June of 1792, advising him to press upon
the Osages from all points. He had given the Quapaw thirty guns and three
pounds of powder for each warrior. 66 As usual, the Quapaw were glad to
accept these gifts and made suitable “big talk” about what they were going
to do to the big bad Osages. Of course, this was for show. Trudeau shows
astuteness and comprehension in a letter he sent to Carondelet in October
of 1792. 67 He points out that the Osages were at war with the Iowa, Sac,
and Fox and would not be likely to get goods from the British. However,
Trudeau notes that this would lead the Osages to attack the Mississippi
settlements. He assures Carondelet that if four or five inhabitants are killed
the rest will move away. Trudeau makes an original suggestion to Carondelet
that, if an embargo is to be implemented, traders with a two year supply of
goods be sent up the Missouri before the embargo is announced.

In his reply to Trudeau in December of 1792, Carondelet approved of
Trudeaus new suggestion. 68 He also ordered an embargo with heavy fines
and penalties for violators. His declaration of war on the Osages is worth
quoting.

At the same time you will proclaim that any subject of His Majesty,
or individual of the other nations, white or red, may overrun the
Great and Little Osages, kill them and destroy their families, as they
are disturbers of the prosperity of all the nations.

It is extremely important to humiliate or destroy those barbarians
which can only be done by using severity. 69

Governor Carondelet probably believed he had taken a decisive step to
eliminate the Osage problem once and for all. Over the following months,
like the Governors before him, he was to learn that “big talk” rolled off the
Osages like water off a duck’s back. Like other Euro-Americans, he had to
learn that the Osages were unlike any other Indians in his experience. They
were too independent-minded to be controlled by mere threats. It was evi¬
dent to the Osages that the Spanish could not make good on their threats.

Big Talk—No Do

Amid the flood of letters rushing in a torrent among the Spanish adminis¬
trators, only one reflected the cold hard stamp of reality. On April 10, 1793,
Zenon Trudeau in writing to Carondelet gave accurate reasons why he was
delaying announcement of the embargo and of war on the Osages until

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 125

July. 70 He candidly notes that all the Indian nations are at war with the
Osages,but that despite this none of them kill more than two Osages a year.
Trudeau points out the strategic geographic location of the Osage home¬
land. Again, he notes the danger of losing the Mississippi settlements if the
Osages become angered. This was a distinct possibility, and it must have
taken extraordinary efforts on the part of the Little Old Men to prevent
the Osages from fulfilling Trudeaus fears.

We must point out the basis for the conflicting viewpoints among the
Osages. The Arkansas bands led by the Bear and Panther clans wanted to do
away with the Euro-Americans. Many among the Little Osages living with
the Big Osages and the Osage River Big Osages agreed with the Arkansas
bands. The Little Osages of the Missouri and most of the Big and Little
Osages on the Osage River favored trade over driving the Euro-Americans
out. This argument set the stage for the splintering of the Arkansas bands
about three years later, in 1796. The final conflict was the selection of White
Hair I (Iron Hawk) as Grand Tsi shu Chief over Claremore II (Town
Maker). These conflicts weakened the power and influence of the Society of
Little Old Men because it weakened the bond of the gentile system. We will
come back to this matter near the end of this chapter.

Apparently, Trudeau’s realistic information only angered Carondelet who
was guided by what he thought the situation should be. He noted his reply
on the margin of Trudeau’s letter. Carondelet s directions were explicit: he
directed that the Indians be incited against the Osages to deliver a general
blow. Significantly, he directed that these Indians be issued arms against the
King’s account in the amount of one thousand pesos. This is significant be¬
cause it is the only recorded authorization to spend such a large sum against
the Osages.

Delino at Arkansas Post informed Carondelet on April 12, 1793, that he
would march against the Osages early in May. This force was to consist of
fifty or sixty Euro-Americans and as many Indian allies. 71 On September
28, 1793, Trudeau informed Carondelet that only the Shawnees and Loups
were ready to march against the Osages in July. 72 Since they only amounted
to a total of one hundred men, the July campaign was abandoned. It is in¬
teresting that Trudeau mentions that the other tribes feared the Americans
would march on their villages if they left to fight the Osages. Trudeau points
out that possibly as many as two hundred Euro-Americans could be raised
in the Illinois district, but not a single one volunteered. He suggests that the
embargo would bring the Osages to their knees.

Trudeau was too well informed about the Osages to believe in the em¬
bargo. He was probably trying to delay a direct conflict with the Osages.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

126 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Clearly, very few if any in the Illinois district wanted to make war on the
Osages. Equally evident is that the Illinois district was better-led than the
residents of Arkansas and Red River districts.

Louis Lorimer was a special Indian agent and interpreter for Carondelet.
He had been sent among the Indian nations to stir them up against the
Osage. On September 17, 1793, he sent a report to Carondelet. 73 He reports
the usual desire of these nations to strike against the Osages. When asked to
set a time for the attack, the nations said it was up to Carondelet to do that
and that they could be ready in ten days. Obviously, the time lapses involved
in this “war,” as well as trying to get the various elements to strike as a
single force, contributed to the Spanish failure.

Without knowing the motives, culture, and backgrounds of the various
Indian nations, it is impossible to determine how much of what they said
was true and how much was false. It seems reasonable to assume that be¬
cause they did not have the strength to oppose the Spanish, Americans, and
Osages simultaneously, they did use a certain amount of diplomacy. That is,
they would try to cozen the Spanish into believing that they and the Span¬
ish shared the common goal of destroying the Osages. There was enough
truth in this to make it believable to the Spanish. However, undoubtedly
many counter motives existed that varied from nation to nation and that
would override the desire for Osage territory. Since these were the real de¬
termining factors in the Indian decisions not to unite in war against the
Osage, they are important in both Osage history and United States history.
Because detailed histories about these nations are not available, we cannot
determine what these factors were.

One of the greatest fallacies perpetuated in Indian wars is the role played
by firearms. It is difficult to find all the reasons for this, but some facts do
stand out. Up until the production of the repeating rifle, the firearm was
inferior to the bow and arrow in Indian warfare. The Indians knew this, the
mountain men knew, and those who fought Indians should have known it.
Facts clearly show that until the repeating rifle appeared, the firearm was
too slow against the bow and arrow. In other words, a fighter armed with a
firearm would look like a pin cushion before he could reload.

The mountain men compensated for this weakness by withholding their
fire. A certainty that the leader of an Indian charge would die discouraged
most Indian attacks on mountain men. In groups of two or more mountain
men, no two rifles were empty at the same time. Indians did use firearms
for their psychological effect and for a first round of fire, but the bow and
arrows were the weapons of death. For deer hunting and other woodland
hunts, the firearm was superior to the bow. This is why the Indians wanted
firearms. Osages rarely used firearms to hunt buffalo before the advent of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 127

metal cartridges. Not only were they dangerous to use from horse back, but
the prime was often lost in the chase. The bow and lance were just as effec¬
tive and they were safer and more reliable.

We wanted to mention these facts about firearms because Euro-Americans
have always wanted to believe the firearm was essential in warfare. Indians
knew Euro-Americans believed this, and, accordingly, used it as an excuse
whenever the need arose. It was used as an excuse to avoid fighting an un¬
wanted war and it was used to acquire munitions for the hunt. The Spanish
were committed to the belief in firearms and based much of their policy
on this belief.

Carondelet had more than the Osages to worry about. George Rogers
Clark, who had led a successful expedition down the Ohio during the
American Revolution, was heading a second expedition. Americans west of
the Appalachians had no outlet for their products except down the Missis¬
sippi. Their products were bulky and heavy, making overland transport pro¬
hibitive in cost except for whiskey. Alexander Hamilton’s Whiskey Tax and
the resultant crushing of the Whiskey Rebellion led to an outcry in the
West for an open port at New Orleans. The Spanish wished to curb Ameri¬
can expansion to protect the Floridas, Texas, and New Mexico. For this rea¬
son, Carondelet closed the Port of New Orleans to American trade. Clark
intended to float down the Mississippi and open the Port of New Orleans
by force if necessary.

By 1794, Carondelet had been well educated in the Osage problem and
was more than ready to drop the Osage war. Clarks expedition worried
Carondelet, so he directed a halt to the Osage war to concentrate more on
the American problem. For many years, a post to be constructed among the
Arkansas bands had been proposed. Arkansas Post had consistently opposed
this, offering the excuse of low waters creating supply problems. Probably,
it was opposed because Arkansas Post wanted the trade. In any event, Caron¬
delet was now ready to try the French post system as a means to controlling
the Osages. Although it was the Arkansas bands that gave the Spanish the
most trouble, they made the choice of placing the fort among the Osage
River bands. Therefore, they began negotiations with Missouri River drain¬
age Osages.

Fort Carondelet
The Beginnings

Manuel Perez proposed a fort among the Osages as early as October 1791. 74
He suggested a small wooden fort be erected overlooking the Osage vil¬
lages on the Osage River. Perez argued that this would strengthen the hand
of those Osages who did not approve of the raids by the Arkansas bands.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

128 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

Governor Miro was replaced by Carondelet before he acted on these sug¬
gestions. Carondelet would not commit himself to this proposal until he
had gone through the Osage educational process.

The time was ripe for someone to revive the idea of an Osage fort as
suggested by Perez. Auguste Chouteau probably instigated the suggestion by
Perez, but now he decided to present the idea himself. “ [Auguste] Chouteau
presented his petition to Carondelet on May 18 [1794] and the latter ac¬
cepted it three days later. Carondelet eagerly seized upon the plan and
authorized Chouteau to proceed while awaiting royal approval, as it was
certain to come.” 7 ' 4 It appears that Chouteau went to New Orleans well
prepared to make his point. Six Osage chiefs were in New Orleans to pe¬
tition for just such a fort.

A tragedy was in the making with the presence of the Osage chiefs in
New Orleans. Three of the six chiefs were slain on their way home. The
deaths of these chiefs was tragic enough, but the effects of the deaths made
it a much greater tragedy. Among the three slain chiefs was Jean Lafon
(Tracks Far Away I), who was the Grand Hun ka Chief. The Grand Division
Chiefs Jean Lafon and Claremore I (Arrow Going Home) were the right and
left hands of the Little Old Men. Through these chiefs, they had managed to
keep the gentile bonds intact and curb the excesses of the Arkansas bands.

With the death of Jean Lafon, the Grand Hun ka Chieftainship went to
Tracks Far Away II (miscalled Big Track). This shifted the Grand Hun ka
Chieftainship to the Arkansas bands and split the gentile divisions. For the
first time, the Grand Chiefs lived in separate villages. Thus, one of the ob¬
jectives of Fort Carondelet—to strengthen the Osage River Osages so as to
better control the Arkansas bands—was destroyed at its inception. This was
tragic for the Spanish because it ruined one of the most intelligent moves
they had made during their tenure in the Mississippi Valley. It was tragic for
the Osage people because it weakened their greatest cultural strength on the
eve of their severest challenge—the coming of the Americans.

It was Governor Manuel Gayoso de Lemos of Natchez who unwittingly
set up the murder of the three Osage chiefs. On May 22, 1794, he sent
a letter to Ugulayacabe, a Chickasaw chief. As a casual note of interest
he wrote, “There is now six Osages in New Orleans [sic] that went there
to entreat for peace. When I know the results I shall acquaint you with
them.” 76 On June 10, 1794, Carondelet wrote to Trudeau, “The great chief
Lafond and two chiefs of the Little Osages were assassinated some twenty
leagues from this fort [New Orleans] through the treachery of the Chicka¬
saw chief Ouilabe, who, having lost his son in the beginning of the year in
an encounter with the Osages, came down here in search of the latter with
twenty-two warriors. Notwithstanding all the means I employed, the care-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 129

lessness of the six Osages in coming to land without arms gave him the
opportunity to kill three of them.” 77

Fearful that these murders under Spanish protection would cause a re¬
newal of Osage animosities, Carondelet made the usual “big talk” against
the Osages. The Chickasaw knew the Osages were coming and were wait¬
ing on the west bank. It seems evident that they acted on de Lemos’s infor¬
mation. Carondelet reveals one facet of his character in his last statement of
the quote. 78 He did not like to accept responsibility for his poor judgment.

The Fort

There was some latitude allowed in the specifications for what became Fort
Carondelet. The blockhouse was to be two-storied, the lower section was to
be of stone, and the upper story of horizontally laid logs. Both levels were
to be thirty-two feet square. A diagonal setting of the top story was speci¬
fied. That is, the sides of the upper section were centered over the corners
of the lower floor. All buildings of the installation were to have tile, slate, or
sod roofs.

One may find a reason to fault Carondelet in some matters, but clearly
he understood fortifications. He specified that the blockhouse command an
unobstructed view of the Big Osage village. This provided direct artillery
fire into the village. With a stone lower floor, ten feet high, the tall Osages
would have difficulty in firing the blockhouse. The offset in the upper story
of the blockhouse provided covering fire in eight directions, with the upper-
story corner overhangs protecting the center walls of the lower floor from
above. Although Carondelet wanted tile or slate roofs he did agree to accept
a sod roof. It is obvious that this was to frustrate any attempt to set the roof
afire with fire arrows. Such arrows were not as effective against thick log
sidewalls as they were against shake shingles.

Placed at the north edge of Halley s Bluff, this blockhouse had a full view
of White Hairs village on the north side of the Osage River. It is worth
observing that there are no known pictures of Fort Carondelet or maps to
verify its location, 79 leading to a suspicion that the fine touch of Auguste
Chouteau was at work. It is possible that Chouteau deviated more than a
little from Carondelet’s specifications and did not wish this to be known
outside his sphere of control. However, a fort was constructed and archaeo¬
logical evidences suggest it was on Halleys Bluff and that it did conform in
many respects to Carondelets specifications.

Chief Making

The Osages were vulnerable to flattery. Since symbolism played a large role
in their lives, any symbolic article was held in awe and veneration. To be

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

130 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

singled out, to receive a symbolic object was a very special honor. In a cul¬
ture based on honors instead of material greed, this was taken as a token of
the Great Creators esteem. It mattered not what source the symbol came
from, for the Great Creator often used unusual means to reward his favored
ones. The desire for honors amounts to greed. White men had a greed for
“things”; the Osages had a greed for honors.

By judicious selection of chiefs who promoted their interests, the Spanish
could present medals to them and thus increase the chiefs stature among the
people. It is notable that in 1795, Iron Hawk or White Hair I received a
large medal, but Town Maker (Claremore II) received only a commission
for a large medal. Between 1795 and 1796, White Hair I became Grand
Tsi shu Chief. We do not want to infer that these medals caused the selection
of White Hair I over Town Maker. Medals could have played a minor role,
but Osage laws governing the Council of Ah Ke tas would have been the
decisive factor in selecting White Hair I.

Band chiefs were another matter since they did not lead by law, although
they did lead by consent. If their people were sufficiently impressed by the
medal gift, all other things being equal, the medalist had a better chance of
becoming a band chief. Thus, the Spanish did have some influence in Osage
government. Significantly, the band chiefs and the Grand Tsi shu Chief
grew in power during the Spanish period, while the Little Old Men and the
Grand Hun ka Chief lost power and influence. However, as in the example
of White Hair I and Town Maker I, there were other overriding factors
at work.

Shortly before the Euro-Americans came to the Osage country, it had
become necessary to reorganize the Osage military government. The Grand
War Party organization, controlled by the Little Old Men, had become so
encumbered by ceremonies that a quick response to an attack could not be
made. In effect, creation of this new organization for war divided the power
to make war between the Little Old Men and the individual bands. No¬
where was the effect of this reorganization more evident than in the activi¬
ties of the Arkansas bands. The erosion of power held by the Little Old Men
was steady from 1700 to 1850. In the same period, the power of the band
chiefs grew in proportion to that lost by the Little Old Men.

During the struggle of the Little Old Men to curb the raids of the Ar¬
kansas bands, the Grand Division Chiefs were also involved. Up to 1794,
when Jean Lafon was killed, both Grand Division Chiefs stood equal to
each other and both supported the views of the Little Old Men. With the
ascension of Tracks Far Away II to the Grand Hun ka Chieftainship, the
Grand Division Chiefs were divided. Tracks Far Away II was with the Ar¬
kansas bands and Claremore I was with the Osage River bands with most

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 131

of the Little Old Men. With the help of the Little Old Men, the Grand
Tsi shu Chief gained in power while the opposition of the Little Old Men
lessened the power of the Grand Hun ka Chief. As a note of interest, if
Claremore II had become Grand Tsi shu Chief, this would have placed both
Grand Chiefs in the Arkansas bands and most of the Little Old Men with
the Osage River bands. This was probably a factor in choosing White Hair
over young Town Maker.

The Spanish were certainly aware that some kind of internal conflict was
going on among the Osages. However, it is doubtful if they understood the
details of the conflict. They knew enough to improve their own position
but not enough to avoid canceling out the improvement they had tempo¬
rarily gained. Although they improved their position with the Osage River
bands, they further weakened their position with the Arkansas bands. Their
strongest support came from the Little Old Men, but by strengthening the
band chiefs they weakened the Little Old Men and thus gave more strength
to the Arkansas bands.

THE TRANSITION PERIOD

There are many stories about why Spain was willing to transfer Louisiana
to France. Thomas Bailey gives three reasons for the transfer. 80 Louisiana was
a heavy liability to Spain and she had been willing to dispose of it since
1795. Thus, the cost of administration and defense of the colony was the
first listed. Next, the colony was an open invitation to invasion and the con¬
sequent cost of a war to defend it would be difficult to justify. Lastly, it had
always been considered as a buffer area for Texas and New Mexico, and
Spain was weary of trying to preserve that status.

One can see the Osage influence in each of these, but Bailey does not
mention the Osage influence. We cannot claim that the Osages were the
outstanding factor of administrative and defense costs in Spanish Louisiana.
However, they were certainly a major factor. Both in direct and indirect
costs, coping with the Osage problem was expensive for the Spanish. Nearly
a third of the letters published from the Bancroft Collection of the docu¬
ments relating to the Spanish in the Mississippi Valley involve the Osage
problem. The carefully selected Spanish documents related to Tennessee,
which have been published in the East Tennessee Historical Society’s Bul¬
letin, show a much smaller percent of mention, but the fact that any men¬
tion is made indicates the far-reaching effect of the Osage problem. From
these facts alone, it is evident that a considerable amount of administrative
time was devoted to Osage matters, as well as direct defense expense.

The Osages hurt Spain indirectly by depriving her of income she would

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

132 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

have had if they had not stood in the way. Spain used the other Indian na¬
tions and their territory in the Mississippi at will. She could use the Osages
and their territory only on Osage terms. Thus, she was deprived of the rich¬
est part of Spanish Illinois and of access to the riches that lay west of the
Osage domain.

In comparison with the areas north, south, and east of the Osage domain,
the resources of the Osage territory were untouched. The Spanish knew
this, the British knew it, and the Americans knew about the potential for
development. This rich prize was tempting to eastern Indians and Euro-
Americans alike. The effort of stemming the tidal surges of eastern Indians,
American, and British intruders while also trying to get a portion of the
Osage empire was a constant problem for the Spanish.

By 1795, it was evident that Spain would not be able to subjugate the
Osages. Without control of the heartland of Louisiana, its value as a buffer
was greatly reduced. Constant Osage pressure on Natchitoches and the
compacting of defeated Indians as far south as San Antonio, Texas, was hurt¬
ing the very areas Louisiana was supposed to buffer. Furthermore, Osage
pressures on the Comanche and Lipan Apache prevented their movement
away from the Rio Grande settlements and prolonged the Indian attacks
there. No wonder Spain was weary of supporting Louisiana. Spain willingly
transferred title of Louisiana to Napoleon and at Bonaparte’s request kept
the transfer secret.

Toussaint L’Ouverture is sometimes called the black Napoleon. Bona¬
parte sent his best general, Leclerc, and fifty thousand of his best troops to
Haiti to establish an operational base. He needed this base because on the
day he openly took over Louisiana, the British would cut his oceanic supply
line. Toussaint and yellow fever destroyed Leclerc and his troops. If a group
of poorly armed rebel slaves in the mountains of Haiti could do this to the
finest army produced in Europe, we must ask a question: What would have
happened to Bonaparte’s army against well-armed Osages in the Ozark
Mountains? Failing to establish a Haitian base, Napoleon abandoned his
Louisiana ambitions and turned to the European wars. Thus, Louisiana was
made available to the United States.

The Osages paid a heavy price for their resistance to intruders and their
expansion, not because of any Spanish policy or intentional actions but
from many indirect influences. The weakening of the Little Old Men and
the gentile bonds greatly reduced the Osage ability to unite against intrud¬
ers. Dispersal of what had been a compact force weakened their strategic
advantage of striking from a core area. Spreading out from the compact core
base in west central Missouri distributed the base over a wider area and

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 133

made rapid communication difficult. The Little Osages had moved to the
headwaters of the Neosho-Grand and the Arkansas bands had moved to the
lower reaches of the same river. Given time, uninterrupted by outside forces,
the Osages probably would have resolved these problems within a genera¬
tion. However, time to adjust did not come to the Osages. They were facing
a cataclysmic change that was totally alien to anything they had experi¬
enced before.

The coming of the Americans caught the Osages unprepared to repel the
American type of intruders. They were torn by internal strife and were
poorly located to effectively resist agricultural intruders such as the Ameri¬
cans. As a result, their dominant status in the heartland of Louisiana was
coming to an end. Up to this time, 1803, they had met the French, Spanish,
and British. Yet, their exposure had been largely to traders, hunters, and a
few habitants. The traders and hunters wanted furs, which fit into the Osage
way of life. Habitants typically lived in a few small cluster villages and
farmed around the village, which caused little disturbance to game animals.
These the Osages could tolerate with few adjustments.

A totally new type of intruder awaited the Osages. The coming of the
Americans was to present situations that the Osages had never experienced
before. They had very little information to guide them in how to respond
to these new situations. While they had fought Americans on the Wabash
River and helped defeat them, they were well aware of Anthony Wayne’s
decisive victory at Fallen Timbers in 1794. All too well they knew of the
terrible treaties that followed.

Acting on what little information and experience they did have, in typi¬
cal Osage fashion, they developed a few guidelines in advance. First, and
foremost, they were determined to never make war on the United States,
and they never did. Fallen Timbers had clearly demonstrated the futility and
retaliation of such actions. This is the only clear and consistent guideline the
Osages had. The others are cloudy because of lack of information and ex¬
perience on the part of the Osages. They might have suspected that many
eastern Indian nations would try to move into their territory. However, they
could not have known of President Jefferson’s plan to move these nations
into their territory on a wholesale basis.

Osages did have some idea of the agricultural intruder problem and had
formulated a policy of avoiding the settlers. They hoped that by avoiding
contact they could prevent the conflicts. What the Osages did not know was
that the United States government had completely lost control of the set¬
tlers when it came to Indian affairs. Thus, they were totally unprepared to
cope with the intruder settler. There is an Osage distinction between a legal

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

134 / Relationships with Euro-Americans

settler and an intruder settler: A legal settler settled on lands that had been
cleared of Indian title, while an intruder settler was on lands to which the
Osages still had title.

Over a span of years, the Osages had evolved ways to deal with other
intruders. Indian and hunting Euro-American intruders were killed and be¬
headed and their heads were placed on stakes. Trader intruders were robbed
and turned back. Intruder farmers were harassed and their horses were sto¬
len. The American intruder settler presented a new situation. These intruder
settlers were not the “noble pioneer” so often portrayed—this stereotype fits
the legal settler much better. The intruder settlers were the dregs of Ameri¬
can society, lawless misfits who sought the frontier to escape punishment
within their own culture. They were the Boheme of America with one in¬
alienable right—they were citizens of the United States. Loudly and persis¬
tently they proclaimed that right and broke every law of the country that
protected them.

The inconsistency inherent in these people completely baffled the Osages,
who were an orderly people. While the Osages had Boheme, these were cast
outside the culture and were afforded no protection. French and Spanish
practice had been to protest and frown on the slaying of their Boheme, but
they had let these actions pass as not worth the effort to retaliate. The Osages
never really found a solution to the problem of the United States’ failure to
enforce intruder provisions in treaties while at the same time punishing the
Osages for enforcing those provisions.

Governor Joe (Star Chief) came close to finding a solution. He was a
huge Osage and better educated than the average Euro-American of his
time. Chancing upon some intruders camped in Osage territory, he helped
himself to their meal. As he ate, the man and wife discussed their possible
fate at the hands of this wild Indian. When he finished, Joe gestured for
them to hitch up and get out. Relieved, they did so and hurried toward
the border, discussing their good fortune in escaping with their hair in¬
tact. As they neared the border Joe overtook them, and, in better English
than they could command, told them if they came back they would be ar¬
rested and tried under Osage law. They never reappeared on Osage lands. Of
course, Joe thoroughly terrorized them before they hitched up, and when he
overtook them they were certain he had changed his mind and would lift
their hair.

Baffled in their efforts to halt the deluge of intruder settlers the Osages
were to turn their efforts to the emigrant nations. Osage experience told
them that attacking other Indians caused less concern than attacking Euro-
Americans. They could not have known that this would bring the wrath of
the United States government down upon them. Osage attacks on emigrant

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Relationships with Euro-Americans / 135

Indians caused those east of the Mississippi to be reluctant to move west of
the great river. It would be more accurate to say it added to their reluctance.
Thus, the voluntary removal envisioned by Jefferson ultimately became a
mandatory removal by military force under Andrew Jackson. The Osages
could not understand this aspect of their own warring on other Indians
until many years later. No one has fully researched this facet of Indian
removal.

It was these unknown factors combined with internal strife and dispersal
of the bands that made the Osages so vulnerable as the Americans crossed
the Mississippi. One cannot read the historical records without noticing an
abrupt change in Osage conduct. No doubt this was partly because of the
deep-seated desire to avoid war with the United States. Yet, the true causes
lie buried deep in the passage of time. Maybe we will never know all
the reasons for this abrupt change. Surely, the reasons we have discussed
were factors in this change, but there were undoubtedly others. The Osages
were not sorry to see the Spanish go, but they were not overjoyed to see the
Americans come into their domain. Being realistic in their approach to life,
they accepted the situation as it was and tried to save what they could of
their culture and domain.

The Osages had lived with the French idealism tempered with a realism
which was so much like their own approach to life. No doubt, the wonder¬
ful Spanish idealism both appealed to the Osages and at the same time re¬
pelled them, for it conflicted with their sense of realism. Americans tended
to be pragmatic. This brusque approach to life offended the Osage love of
pomp and deep idealistic symbolism. Yet, at the same time, it inspired the
sense of realism in the Osage character. The observant Osage curiosity was
continually piqued by the fact that whatever the Americans did, it worked,
at least for the Americans.

They were amazed at the technological changes that appeared after 1803 .
Improved firearms quickly caught their attention. New trade goods led to
rapid depletion of their game reserve, so great was their desire for the new
items of trade. Boats that walked on their rivers brought hordes of Ameri¬
cans to their country. Wagons that were vastly superior to those of the
French and Spanish brought more Americans. The changes were so sudden
that the people could not adapt to them fast enough. It was a catastrophic
force beyond their ability to adjust. They were overwhelmed.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART TWO

Eroding the Osage Civilization,

1803-1850

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Coming of the Americans

LEWIS AND CLARK
First Reaction

Although the Osages were aware that the Americans would ultimately oc¬
cupy Louisiana and had made some plans to cope with these new people, the
suddenness of its occurrence caught them by surprise. We are fortunate to
have an account of the Osage reaction to the news of the Americans taking
over Louisiana. On May 31, 1804, the Lewis and Clark Expedition met a
canoe which had descended the Osage River. 1 A Frenchman with an In¬
dian man and woman were the canoes only passengers. The Frenchman
gave the Expedition an account of the Osage reaction to Chouteau’s letter
to them in which he informed them of the American Occupation.

They burned the letter because they did not believe it spoke the truth.
After some deliberation, Chouteau’s agent among the Osages was told that
if this was true, the Osages would no longer trade with St. Louis. The infer¬
ence was that the Osages would trade with the British instead of with the
Americans. Undoubtedly, this was an Osage bluff war thrust. It carried the
threat of a shift in Osage trade and support from St. Louis to the British.
We cannot be certain this was entirely a bluff tactic. However, it would be
in keeping with the many times this ploy had been used against the Spanish
with gratifying effect. Certainly, the Osages were realistic in diplomatic
matters. They were undoubtedly aware of the many Americans along the
Ohio River, which far outnumbered the British traders to the north. If this
was a threat, it was probably a move to place the Americans in a more suit¬
able frame of mind to make concessions to the Osages. Assuming it was a
bit of bluff war, it would fit in very well with the next Osage move. Yet, the
Osages were to be disillusioned if their intent was to gain concessions from
the Americans.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

140 / Coming of the Americans
FIRST OSAGE DELEGATION TO WASHINGTON
The Osages Meet Jefferson

If the Osages expected any significant concessions from the American fa¬
ther, President Jefferson, they were doomed to disappointment. Centuries of
treating with the Indian nations would have taught them to expect few
concessions in a first diplomatic encounter, so they likely had no early ex¬
pectations. However, they were surely shaken by later events, for the Ameri¬
cans made few, if any, concessions to the Osages.

Yet, the American officials from Jefferson on down were well aware of
the necessity of keeping the Osages friendly to the United States. There¬
fore, they planned the reception of the Osage delegation with care. By
July of 1804, the delegation of twelve Osage chiefs and two boys, escorted
by Auguste Chouteau, were near the Shenandoah Valley. On July 9, 1804,
Henry Dearborn, Secretary of War, sent orders to hurry the party to Wash¬
ington with a special military escort. 2 This effort was evidently effective,
for on July 12, 1804, President Jefferson welcomed the delegation to Wash¬
ington. 3

Jefferson wrote of the meeting the next day in a letter to Robert Smith,
Secretary of the Navy. 4 He describes the Osages as, “the most gigantic men
we have ever seen.” Jefferson also wrote, “They are the finest men we have
ever seen.” Being aware of the importance of these Osage visitors, the Presi¬
dent wanted to impress them with American justice, liberality, and power.
With this in mind, he encouraged them to sightsee in the Washington area.

Jefferson’s statement about the Osage importance to the United States
deserves repeating: “Jefferson then summed up the American attitude to¬
ward the stronger western tribes, revealing in a few words the justification
for the expense; the anxiety; and the elaborate detail with which he and
Dearborn had arranged for Lewis to send back these delegations. ‘The truth
is,’ he said, ‘they are the great nation South of the Missouri, their possession
extending from thence to the Red river, as the Sioux are great North of that
river. With these two powerful nations we must stand well, because in their
quarter we are miserably weak.’ ” 5

Clearly, the President differed from the Spanish in his dealings with the
Osages. Possibly it was because of Jefferson’s strange mixture of idealism
and realism, which was shared by the Osages. Such mental outlooks cannot
be turned on or off to suit special situations. The Osages sensed this men¬
tal trait in the French and they sensed it in Jefferson. While they liked the
President, they also realized that he was nonetheless a great danger to them.
Reading faces, gestures, and body movements was a highly developed art

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Coming of the Americans / 141

practiced among the Osages. These nonverbal clues, along with Jefferson’s
words, told them what to expect.

Jefferson’s Formal Speech

In his formal address to the delegation (on July 16,1804),Jefferson outlined
his intentions. 6 He made eleven major points in his speech: (1) He expressed
regrets and sorrow for the deaths of Osages at the hands of the Sac and Fox
(A raiding party had killed these Osages as their delegation was leaving
Missouri). While Jefferson presented this as a condolence, he also included a
clear notice that warring under United States law would not be allowed;
(2) In his second point, Jefferson tried to establish a bridge of common
bond. He pointed out that Americans were born in America and came from
the same soil as those in the Osage delegation; (3) He continued this theme
into the third point and assured the delegation there would be no more
changes in government. He noted that France and Spain were governed by
a European government, but Americans were governed by an American one;
(4) The President then entered into trade matters, which had been his main
purpose in addressing the delegation. After pointing out the mutual advan¬
tage of trade, Jefferson hinted at a government-sponsored fur trading fac¬
tory, with stress being placed on fair prices and fair treatment. Ultimately,
this system was initiated by the establishment of Fort Clark, better known
as Fort Osage; (5) Building on the basis of mutual benefit from a fair fur
trade, Jefferson’s speech turned to the need to expand trade, and he ex¬
plained the American necessity to explore the Missouri River. In this way,
Jefferson opened the subject of exploring Louisiana;

6) Since Jefferson realized the importance of the Osages in these explo¬
rations, he promoted his plans to explore the Red and Arkansas Rivers as
an enhancement to the Osage trade. Furthermore, he asked for Osage assis¬
tance toward the expeditions that would visit them 7 ; (7) Besides the Mis¬
souri and Arkansas expeditions, Jefferson also announced his intentions to
explore Kansas and into the Republican Pawnee country;

8) The rift between the Missouri bands and the Arkansas bands were of
great concern to Jefferson. He promised that he would do all in his power
to help heal the rift and bring the people together again; (9) To keep peace
between the Osages and the Americans, an agent was to be sent among
them to settle disputes that arose between the two people; (10) Jefferson
invited the Osages to explore and observe the area around Washington,
likening it to the American desire to explore and observe in Louisiana;
(11) The President concluded his address with a plea for peace among all the
nations.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

142 / Coming of the Americans

A copy of the reply by White Hair I and the Little Osage chief, Dog
Soldier, does not exist. It certainly would have been interesting to know
how they responded to the intentions outlined by Jefferson. Their response
was probably cloaked in courtesy and probably contained notable omissions.
Certainly, the President did not mention his plans to remove eastern nations
to Osage territory.

Ample evidence shows that the Osages ignored Jefferson’s first point, that
warring among the nations would not be permitted. All through the 1804-
1850 period the Osages warred on the other Indian nations. The Presidents
sixth point, which involved the exploration of the Red River and the Ar¬
kansas River, shows the depth of Jefferson’s information. He knew very
well that the delegation represented only the Missouri bands. This is also
evident in a letter from Dearborn to Pierre Chouteau dated July 12, 1804
(four days before Jefferson addressed the Osage delegation from Missouri):
“You will take the necessary measures for obtaining permission of the Big-
track [Tracks Far Away] and his party for the safe passage of any party
which may be sent by the President of the United States to explore the
sources of the Arkansas river and the interior country generally bordering
on the waters of the Red River.” 8

One aspect leaps out at the reader of these early American documents,
that is, the practice of asking permission in advance of an action. It is un¬
likely that this was overlooked by the Osages, since important Osage in¬
truder laws hinged on prior permission. Jefferson apparently knew that the
success of the explorations required prior permission. The Osages could not
refuse assent under their law, but their cooperation was less than enthusiastic.

One cannot help noticing the contrast between the American approach
to the Osages and that of the Spanish. The Americans were well led by one
of the most brilliant minds in history. Jefferson’s knowledge of the Osages
attests to his ability to garner information and, more important, use the
information to accomplish significant goals. The Spanish attempted to dic¬
tate Osage conduct and met failure. Possibly, their successes with the more
docile Indians to the south had conditioned them to a dictatorial approach
in Indian affairs.Jefferson and his countrymen had experienced terrible In¬
dian wars and realized that, until they were in a position to dictate, they
must respect Indian laws and customs. Once they had attained a majority,
the Americans dictated terms as well.

The Return Trip

Great care was exercised in returning the Osage delegation to their homes.
Henry Dearborn wrote to Moses Hooke at Pittsburgh, directing him to be
ready for the delegation by August 20,1804. 9 The delegation rode horseback

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Coming of the Americans / 143

from Washington to Pittsburgh, then took a boat down the Ohio River,
accompanied by a military escort consisting of a noncommissioned officer
and six men. They left the Ohio at Massac, Illinois, and traveled overland
under military escort to Kaskaskia. One member of the delegation became
ill in Washington and could not leave with the others. He was personally
and carefully escorted back to St. Louis by the United States government. 1 "

Some time had passed without any word from the Lewis and Clark Ex¬
pedition. A rumor started that the Osage delegation was serving as hostages
for the safety of the expedition. But even though a false report of the death
of both Lewis and Clark reached the Capital during the time the delegation
was still in Washington, they were not treated as hostages. 11 It is possible that
the British initiated the false rumors in an effort to alienate the Osages and
other Indians from the Americans.

On April 17, 1805, Captain Meriwether Lewis sent Jefferson a collection
of flora and fauna he had collected, along with a catalog of the items. 12
Among the specimens were the skins and skeletons of a male and female
antelope. These pronghorn samples were the first to be seen by the scientific
world. Jefferson had heard about the pronghorn while visiting with the
Osage delegation and was eager to learn more about the animal. In a letter
to the naturalist William Bartram, dated April 7, 1805, he wrote, “The
Osage Indians shewed me a specimen of its leather, superior to any thing of
the kind I ever saw. Their manner of dressing the leather too receives en¬
quiry, as it receives no injury from being wet. I count on special informa¬
tion as to this animal from Capt. Lewis, and that he will enrich us with
other articles of Zoology, in which he is more skilled than in botany.” 13
Note that Lewis was sending Jefferson, from Fort Mandan, the very thing
he wrote about, on the same day, April 7, 1805.

SEARCH FOR PEACE

Jefferson, like the Spanish before him, tried to bring about peace among the
Indian nations west of the Mississippi. He meant what he told the Osage
delegation in Washington. The President was aware of the differences among
the various Indian groups, but thought that, as an administrative matter, es¬
tablishing a single uniform policy would make it easier and cheaper to ad¬
minister Indian affairs. As history testifies, this decision was extremely ex¬
pensive for both the United States and Indians in general. Before such a
policy could be applied, the warfare growing out of the Indian differences
must be abolished. Neither Jefferson nor the United States government ever
solved this problem of Indian differences. As a result, there are more excep¬
tions than uniformity in United States Indian Policy.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

144 / Coming of the Americans

As usual, all peace efforts involving the Indian nations started with a gen¬
eral council, and so did the peace efforts of the United States. James Wilkin¬
son, commanding at St. Louis, wrote to Secretary Dearborn on Septem¬
ber 22, 1805, 14 pointing out that the two greatest expenses in Indian affairs
are the visits to St. Louis and Washington by Indian delegations. Visiting was
a strong custom among the Osages. It was a gesture of friendship to visit
someone, and it was less than friendly to refuse to receive a visitor or to
refuse a visitor food, drink, and gifts. The reception of a visitor was a way
to distinguish friend from foe.

Wilkinson urged the rapid establishment of factors and agents among the
nations in order to reduce the expenses of visiting St. Louis. Yet, at the same
time he was suggesting that delegations to Washington be continued for
two years so the nations would be impressed by the United States. At this
time, 1805, Wilkinson was sending to Washington a western delegation
composed of representatives from the Arikaree, Otoe-Missouri, Sioux (Da¬
kota), Sac, Iowa, and Fox. As the delegation was about to leave, seven Re¬
publican Pawnees arrived in St. Louis and were also sent to Washington.

Wilkinson mentioned the coming conference of the hostile nations as a
final note in his letter. Apparently, twenty Osage chiefs, led by White Hair I,
were in St. Louis for the peace council. Little came of the council since so
many hostile chiefs were in Washington. Surely, there would have been
very little, if any, easing of warfare among the Indian nations. However, the
trips to Washington apparently were effective in curbing attacks on Euro-
Americans.

FEAR OF WAR

The Americans feared an Osage attack upon them. In a letter written Au¬
gust 18, 1809, Meriwether Lewis—who became governor of the Louisiana
Territory after returning from his expedition—expresses a fear of an Osage
war. 15 Pierre Chouteau was up the Missouri while the Osage Treaty of 1808
was waiting for Senate ratification (it was ratified April 28, 1810). Lewis
feared Chouteau, who had negotiated the treaty with the Osages, might
be replaced by another agent. He writes, “The reasons for wishing Mr.
Chouteau not to be displaced is that if the event takes place before one or
the other Osage treaties are ratified there will in my opinion be War with
that nation.” 16

The plural of treaty is used in Lewis’s comment because there were ac¬
tually two treaties. The main treaty was negotiated by Pierre Chouteau on
November 10, 1808, at Fire Prairie near Fort Osage, but this treaty was
signed only by the White Hair and Little Osage bands. A second companion

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Coming of the Americans / 145

treaty was negotiated by Governor Lewis at St. Louis on August 31, 1809.
Provisions of the second treaty were identical to the Fire Prairie Treaty, but
it was signed only by the Arkansas bands.

FOLLOWING IN SPANISH FOOTSTEPS

Governor Lewis had reason to fear an Osage war. In a letter of July 26,1808,
he wrote, “I have in several late conferences with the Shawnee, Delawares,
Kickapoos, Soos, Saues [Sac],Jaways [Iowa], &c. declared the Osage nation
no longer under the protection of the United States, and set them at liberty
to adjust their several differences with that abandoned nation in their own
way, but have prohibited their attacking them except with a sufficient force
to destroy or drive them from our neighborhood.” 17 Lewis, in a fit of pique,
had provided an opening for the British to expand into the Osage coun¬
try. By declaring the Osages no longer under the protection of the United
States, he inadvertently left the Osages free to seek protection under the
British flag.

It is obvious that the Osages had not been cooperative in keeping the
peace. Like the Spanish before him, Lewis became so frustrated that he let
his feelings take control of his better judgment. But by November of the
same year, he had regained his poise. Article Ten of the Treaty of 1808
specifically places the Osages under the protection of the United States.
Thus, Lewis reversed himself. From the wording in Article Ten, clearly
Lewis feared his rash action would drive the Osages into the British camp:
”[A]nd the said nations, on their part, declare that they will consider them¬
selves under the protection of no other power whatsoever; disclaiming all
right to cede, sell or in any manner transfer their lands to any foreign
power.” 18

One must bear in mind that the boundaries of Louisiana had not yet
been determined in 1808. The French-Spanish claim, which the United
States had acquired by purchase, conflicted with the British claim to the
northern portion of what ultimately was included in the Louisiana Pur¬
chase. However, in 1808, the British claim, while weak, would have been
materially strengthened if the Osages had placed themselves under British
protection.

Another factor at work against Lewis was the growing war movement in
the United States. The West wanted the British removal from the Old
Northwest, as provided in the Treaty of Paris (1783), the treaty that ended
the American Revolution. By 1812, the war movement had gained such mo¬
mentum that it brought about the War of 1812. The United States could
ill-afford to have the most powerful nation on the lower Missouri allied

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

146 / Coming of the Americans

with the British while the shadow of a possible British-American war lay
upon the land. The Treaty of Ghent in 1815 ended the War of 1812 and
removed any possible Osage-British alliance. This possibility was further
barred in the Osage Treaty of 1815.

While the Treaty of Ghent and the Osage Treaty of 1815 severed any
possible Osage-British alliance, neither offered any immediate solution to
the British problem. The British were in no hurry to vacate the territory
they occupied in the Old Northwest and Northern Louisiana. They still ex¬
erted a considerable amount of influence among the Indian nations in these
areas. Governor William Clark, in writing to Thomas Jefferson on Octo¬
ber 10, 1816, from St. Louis, 19 mentioned that while he could keep the na¬
tions of Missouri at peace, the tribes east of the Mississippi, especially high
up that river, were a problem. In at least one case, he allowed the Missouri
nations to war on those nations east of the Mississippi. He gives his reasons
for allowing this as prevention of British influence among the Missouri In¬
dians and to prevent a confederation of Mississippi nations that could de¬
stroy the Louisiana settlements. This condition could not have existed much
beyond 1820, for by that time the British were concentrating their efforts
from the eastern Rockies to the Pacific in the Northwest, thus setting the
stage for the struggle to establish the border at 54°4o'.

In the same letter, Clark gives an estimate of population in upper Loui¬
siana. He gives the non-Indian population as between 35,000 and 40,000
people. This would be over thirty times the non-Indian population in 1771,
which was only 1,102. Virtually all this increase came between 1804 and
1816. The increase was so large between 1804 and November of 1808 that
the Osages became alarmed enough to want space between the new settlers
and themselves. Therefore, they were willing to cede three quarters of east¬
ern Missouri and Arkansas. If only Euro-Americans had been involved, they
would have been more reluctant to make these cessions. However, many
northeastern and southeastern nations were also crossing the Mississippi and
settling in Osage territory. The tidal wave of impacted Indian nations and
land-hungry Americans were now engulfing the Osage People.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions

TREATIES

Introduction

Treaties are agreements between two or more sovereign nations. Sover¬
eignty lies at the base of all treaties. To avoid any misunderstanding here,
sovereignty must be clearly defined. Sovereignty is the power to make and
enforce laws. This power is divided into two types: internal sovereignty and
external sovereignty. Internal sovereignty is the power to make and enforce
laws within a geographical area, and it is applied to the society within that
area only. External sovereignty is the power to make and enforce laws out¬
side one’s own boundaries, which affects other areas and societies.

One indisputable fact stands out in the relationships between the Ameri¬
can Indians and the nations of Western civilization. The American Indians
had owned, occupied, and exercised sovereignty over the land for at least ten
thousand years before Columbus stood on American soil. Euro-Americans
had no alternate sane choice other than to recognize this fact, so they did
recognize Indian sovereignty.

By applying the egocentric logic of assumed superiority, Western civili¬
zation rationalized the usurpation of Indian sovereignty and the seizing of
Indian territory. This rationalized “justice” was cloaked in various terms,
such as “we are saving heathen souls,” “we can put the land to its highest
use,” and “we have a right to unused, unoccupied lands.” But, no matter
how one looks at these “justifications,” they are all merely expressions of an
assumed superiority.

No reasonable mind could deny that the technology or hardware of
Western civilization was superior to that of the Indian civilizations. How¬
ever, in matters of cultural intangibles, there are valid reasons to question
the superiority of Western civilization over Indian civilizations.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

148 / Treaties and Land Cessions

In a very real sense, Indian governments were superior to those of West¬
ern civilization in many respects. If one accepts the premise that the gov¬
ernment that provides the greatest benefit for the greatest number of its
people and the greatest voice in its control is the best government, then one
must admit that Indian governments were superior to those of Western civi¬
lization. There is no doubt that in 1500, a higher percentage of Indians en¬
joyed better housing, better nutrition, better clothing, and greater freedom
than the conditions that prevailed in Western civilization. One may ar¬
gue that this was because there were fewer resources per person in Europe
than in America. The counter argument to this is that such imbalances in
resource-population ratios are caused by flaws in a culture and not by flaws
of the land. Since governments are a leading factor in a culture, then, in part,
such imbalances reflect back to flaws in government.

We have digressed from our main discussion of treaties to show that the
basis for the actions of Euro-Americans was not really valid. Thus, we have
dealt with the academic aspects of our discussion. Reality consists of illogi¬
cal acts instead of acts of reason. 1 Regardless of how one reasons, the fact
stands that the European colonial powers recognized Indian sovereignty as a
necessity to establish a foothold in the Americas. Once a foothold was es¬
tablished, Indian external sovereignty was restricted to agreements with the
occupying European power. For example, the Indians in the areas claimed
by the British could make treaties with the British but not with the French
or Spanish.

The Proclamation of 1763

The Proclamation of 1763, issued by George III, was a significant event in
the making of treaties with Indian nations. 2 As the French and Indian War
was ending, Pontiac led an effort to oust British settlers from Indian terri¬
tory. Realizing some order had to be established to avoid such clashes be¬
tween the two cultures, the London government issued the Proclamation.
The sections of this new colonial policy dealing with Indians set a pattern
that was followed by the United States.

In the first provision, the individual colonial governments were forbidden
to make Indian treaties. The second provision gave exclusive Indian treaty
making powers to the central (London) government. The reasoning that no
uniform Indian policy could emerge from thirteen sources lay behind these
two provisions. Several gaping holes were present in this reasoning, however,
not the least being the uniformity concept itself. It was thought in London,
with some justification, that treaties made by the colonial governments led
to exploitation of Indians by traders and land speculators. Although it was
expected that centralized treaty-making would stop the exploitation, this

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 149

expectation was not fulfilled, for those with influence in the central govern¬
ment also exploited the Indians. In effect, this policy only added another
layer of exploitation.

The third and final Indian provision of the Proclamation of 1763 intro¬
duced the segregation concept into Anglo-American-Indian policy. This
provision drew an imaginary line along the crest of the Appalachians. Euro-
American settlement was permitted east of this line, but west of the line
was reserved for Indians. It was hoped that by segregating the two cultures,
incidents such as Pontiac’s war could be avoided. Thus, two patterns in In¬
dian relationships were established: The first was centralized treaty-making;
the second established the impossibility of keeping settlers out of reserva¬
tions. Thus segregation could not work.

From the English colonists’ viewpoint, they were the ones who had
fought and won the French and Indian War in America. Nowhere was this
feeling stronger than on the frontier. With the French threat removed and a
fortified belief in their ability to deal with the Indian menace, the frontier
settlers developed a confidence in their self-sufficiency. Thus, they ignored
the British efforts to keep them out of the Indian reservation west of the
crest of the Appalachians. This practice of reservation “jumping” was so
firmly ingrained in the frontier character that it remained a problem into
the twentieth century.

As controversy with the mother country changed to conflict, the United
States had no option except to follow the Indian policies that had already
been established by the British. If the Confederation were to repudiate the
policies, they would face a real possibility of a general Indian war all along
the western frontier. Any increase in Indian hostility, however slight, would
tip the balance for the British and invite a Spanish or French invasion from
the south.

Articles of Confederation

Realizing the importance of Indians to their cause, the Continental Con¬
gress, in 1775, acted to deal with Indian problems. A commissioner was ap¬
pointed for each of the departments, north, middle, and southern. These
commissioners were more diplomat than administrator, with men such as
Benjamin Franklin and Patrick Henry being appointed to the positions. 3
With the ratification of the Articles of Confederation in 1781, continuation
of these policies was assured. Article Six has two provisions that bear on the
policies and Article Nine contains another provision.

ARTICLE SIX: “No state without the consent of the United States
in Congress assembled shall send any embassy to, or receive any em-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

150 / Treaties and Land Cessions

bassy from, or enter into any conference, agreement, or alliance or
treaty with any king, prince, or state;

No state shall engage in any war without the consent of the United
States in Congress assembled, unless such state be actually invaded by
enemies, or shall have received certain advice of a resolution being
formed by some nation of Indians to invade such state, and the danger
is so imminent as not to admit of a delay.”

ARTICLE NINE: “The United States in Congress assembled shall
also have the sole and exclusive right and power of. . . regulating the
trade and managing all affairs of the Indians, not members of any of
the states, provided that the legislative right of any state within its
own limits be not infringed or violated.” 4

It is evident from these provisions that the central government was to not
only have the sole right of making Indian treaties, but it also reserved the
right to make all official contacts, including making war on Indians.

In its short eight years of existence, the Confederation accomplished
more than most governments accomplish in a century. To call this govern¬
ment a failure is a gross abuse of the truth. The Confederation issued two
ordinances that still stand as two of the greatest legislative acts in history.
These were the Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance of
1787. Regretfully, we must confine our attention to the portions dealing
with Indians. The Land Ordinance of 1785 opens with a statement of In¬
dian policy that has rarely been violated: “Be it ordained by the United
States in Congress assembled that the territory ceded by individual states to
the United States, which has been purchased from the Indian inhabitants,
shall be disposed of in the following manner.” 5

According to C. C. Royce and C. Thomas, the only exception to this
policy was the “Sioux Indians in Minnesota, after the outbreak in 1862.” 6
In this case another reservation was provided and the net proceeds from the
land sale was credited to the Sioux.

Article Three of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 also contains a pro¬
vision involving Indians:

The utmost good faith shall always be observed toward the Indians;
their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their
consent; and in their property, rights, and liberty they shall never be
invaded or disturbed unless in just and lawful wars authorized by
Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity shall from time
to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for
preserving peace and friendship with them. 7

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 151

We believe this is a sincere, well intentioned, but wishful policy statement.
Too much is left to interpretation depending upon which cultural yardstick
the interpreter uses. No one in a right mind could ever believe these policy
objectives were ever obtained.

The Constitution provided for a federal union instead of a confederated
union like the Confederation. Although the proponents proposed a balanc¬
ing of powers between the central government and the member common¬
wealths (called states), the central government emerged as stronger in prac¬
tice. The only specific mention of Indians in the Constitution is in Article
One, Section Eight: “To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among
the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” 8 Since in 1789, Indian nations
were still considered to possess full internal sovereignty and minimal exter¬
nal sovereignty, this clause placed them in a special quasi-foreign-nation
class. Until after 1815, the reality in North America was that most Indian
nations possessed full sovereignty. The “fiction” of sovereignty did not be¬
come a reality until after 1815. Abandoning the earlier use of nation and
using the term tribe seems to indicate that the United States under the Con¬
stitution expected to reduce the Indian nations to subordinate units of gov¬
ernment somewhere between foreign nations and commonwealths. Appar¬
ently, the Indian governments of today are somewhat below commonwealth
status but above county government in several aspects. They exist as a
unique form of government within the structure of American government
yet apart from all other organized governmental units.

United States

Between 1778 and 1871, over 400 treaties were negotiated with Indian na¬
tions. Of these, 370 were ratified by the Senate. 9 The last negotiated treaty
was the Drum Creek Treaty or the Osage Treaty of 1868. This treaty was
so bad that even the settlers opposed it, and, therefore, it was never ratified.
In the light of the storm engendered by this outrageous treaty and the
increased use of treaties for the benefit of corporations, especially rail¬
road land grants, Congress abolished the treaty-making process with In¬
dian nations through the Act of March 3, 1871 (16 Stat. 566). The Osages
were the first to come under this new process in the Act of July 15, 1870
(16 Stat. 362).

Although the actual Act eliminating the treaty-making process was not
enacted until 1871, the 1870 Osage agreement was made under the authority
of the pending Act of 1871. Actual purchase of the Osage reservation was
not made until June 5, 1872 (17 Stat. 228). This Act of 1872 verified the
agreement of 1870, as well as served its main purpose of authorizing pur¬
chase of the present reservation.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

152 / Treaties and Land Cessions

No Indian government of the United States possesses any external sov¬
ereignty today. Internal sovereignty is extremely limited by the veto pow¬
ers of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Yet, some inalienable sovereignty still
exists, but it is only a whisper in the winds of the “fiction” of Indian sov¬
ereignty. This last thread with the past could be snapped asunder by a simple
Act of Congress. If this thread is sheared, a significant part of this great
nation will be cast adrift in a sea of uncertainties and a valuable part of the
United States will be lost forever. The honor and integrity of this nation
and the principles of natural rights upon which it was founded will also be
lost, for a nation without honor and integrity cannot survive.

The Seven Treaties, 1808-1839
The Treaty of 1808

The land cessions within the seven Osage treaties made between 1808-1839
will be discussed later under a different heading. Here we will discuss the
provisions in the seven treaties that covered other matters. The background
involving the Treaty of 1808 has already been given in the preceding sec¬
tions of this chapter.

The first two Articles of the Treaty of 1808 (7 Stat. 107) provide for the
establishment of Fort Clark (Fort Osage) and a federal trading factory.'"The
wording of Article One—which stresses that the role of the fort is to pro¬
vide protection for the Osages—is misleading. Over centuries of conflict,
the Osages had capably protected themselves. No mention of protection
from Euro-Americans is made, only protection from other Indians. Since
the fort clearly was not built to protect the Osages, we must seek other
motives for its construction.

While Jefferson did place the United States in debt through the Louisi¬
ana Purchase, he was one of the more frugal presidents and did not spend
without reason. Therefore, it becomes evident that the expense of construct¬
ing Fort Osage was necessary from a viewpoint of national interest. If it was
in any sense a gift or payment for the benefit of the Osage people, it was
coincidental to the general welfare and national defense needs of the United
States. Obviously, the fort was built to promote commerce and to curb Brit¬
ish expansion on the Missouri.

All Indian treaties we have studied show this type of “placing the mon¬
key on the Indians back,” that is, making the desires of the United States
appear to be a desire for the benefit of the Indian. No doubt, the Indians
often detected this device, but usually they were not in a position to effec¬
tively object. In other cases, the language barrier or deliberate cloaking of
the real intent prevented Indians from detecting harmful and expensive pro¬
visions in treaties.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 153

Article Two was a well thought out provision and fair to the Osages.
Greed leads to terrible abuses of justice. The fur trade was profitable, but it
was an open invitation to exploit Indians and fur-bearing animals. If the
general population and the Indians were to reap the maximum benefit from
the fur resources, the industry had to have established standards of regula¬
tion and ethics. The federal factory system introduced by Article Two did
this. Osages could bring their furs to Fort Osage at any time of the year and
trade for a wide range of fair-priced goods. Some measure of the success of
this plan can be gained from the anguished complaints of the private trad¬
ers. They could no longer pressure the Osages to trade for shoddy, limited,
over-priced goods. The traders’ complaints ultimately forced the closing of
all government factories (see the Treaty of 1822).

Several provisions were contained in Article Three. A blacksmith was to
be provided at Fort Osage, and either a horse- or water-operated mill was
to be built. Plows were to be furnished and blockhouses were to be built at
Fort Osage for the chiefs of the Missouri Big Osages and Little Osages.

The Moh se Kali he (Blacksmith) was an important person to the Osages.
Since they had no experience or tools needed to work metals, any damage
to a firearm often rendered the weapon useless. Without a blacksmith, a
damaged firearm could only be discarded. Since this was true of all articles
containing metals, an inordinate amount of replacement trading was neces¬
sary. Thus, a blacksmith was very important in Osage life by 1800.

American mills were designed to grind wheat, corn, and other small do¬
mestic grains. Since the traditional Osage hand-grinding tools processed all
the corn they raised, plus nuts, dried meat, and dried fruits or roots, the
power mill was of no benefit to them. In fact, both the mill and plows
were totally useless to the Osages. Both were premature assumptions that
the Osage hunting culture would become an agrarian culture in two or
three years. For many years (to 1890), the Osages traded the plows for things
they could use.

Block houses and cabins for influential chiefs were common features of
Osage treaties. These operated as “a carrot on a stick” in order to gain sup¬
port for acceptance of a treaty. Either unwittingly (or possibly knowingly)
on the part of the Americans, these incentives struck a chord of pleasure in
the honors-based Osage culture. 11 It was not a desire of the chiefs for ma¬
terial gain that made these structures so influential at this early date. In the
Osage culture of 1808, all the people shared in this honor bestowed upon
their leader. We can say with confidence that these structures remained un¬
occupied by Osages, for they had a deep mistrust, verging upon fear, of log
structures. Their oval lodges were safer and more comfortable. 12

Article Four touches upon a raw wound. A sum of five thousand dollars

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

154 / Treaties and Land Cessions

was set aside to pay American citizens for property taken by Osages. Noth¬
ing is said about stolen Osage horses, plundering of Osage graves, or killing
of Osage game and fur animals. While these matters were sometimes caused
by different cultural views of land ownership, it amounted, after all, to a
two-way road in the acts and a one-way road in payment as the consequence
of the acts. One must also consider which of the two parties was the in¬
truder and which had prior claim to the area where the incidents occurred.

One of the most misunderstood Articles in the Treaty of 1808 was Ar¬
ticle Eight. The Osages always understood this Article to mean that they still
retained the hunting rights on all the lands they ceded in Missouri and Ar¬
kansas. Their agreement was that all areas not occupied by American citi¬
zens or specifically assigned to emigrant Indian nations were to be considered
as Osage hunting territory.

Since no interpreter is named in the Fire Prairie version of the treaty, it
is assumed that Pierre Chouteau acted as both the American negotiator and
interpreter. Noel Mongrain should have been the Osage interpreter. Pierre
Chouteau probably had a more limited Osage vocabulary and understand¬
ing of the Osages than Noel Mongrain.

Despite Pierre Chouteau’s command of the language, the wording in Ar¬
ticle Eight is complex and difficult to comprehend in English. Placing these
concepts into the Osage language would be close to impossible. Thus, it is
very probable that Chouteau and the Osages misunderstood each others
intent and agreement. Since the Arkansas band also went over this same
Article, which was explained by Mongrain, and they arrived at the same
understanding as the Missouri bands, apparently the misunderstanding was
either a flaw in communication or a deliberate misconstruction.

In any event, the misunderstanding of Article Eight caused both the
Osages and the United States serious problems. The most serious problem
arose on the Arkansas between the Osage Arkansas bands and the emigrant
Cherokee “Old Settlers.” These “Old Settlers” moved west of the Missis¬
sippi and settled on selected lands that had been Osage territory. Problems
arose when these Cherokees started hunting on unselected lands considered
by the Osages, as they understood Article Eight, to be their hunting terri¬
tory. 13

It was the rigid enforcement of their hunting rights by the Osages that
made the Cherokee “New Settlers” so reluctant to move west of the Mis¬
sissippi. This reluctance was a real problem for the United States, since the
Cherokee country to the east was filling rapidly with Anglo-American set¬
tlers. President Jackson finally forced the “New Settlers” to move west un¬
der military escort. This action has been so dramatized that other removals
are forgotten.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 155

Article Nine was a conglomeration of provisions meant to solve prob¬
lems arising from cultural conflicts. However, like most treaties between the
Osages and the United States, the solutions were one-way in favor of the
United States at the expense of the Osage. All cases of controversy were to
be settled by the United States. While showing a complete distrust and lack
of confidence in Osage justice, the United States was asking the Osages to
trust and accept American justice.

If a two-way approach had been instituted, many problems could have
been avoided. For example, the more serious offenses could have been
settled by American justice and minor offenses by Osage justice. In all
but the most serious offenses, Osage justice had milder punishments than
American justice, but they would have been enforced.

As the condition evolved under this Article, the Osages were always
guilty and Euro-Americans or members of the emigrant nations were al¬
ways ruled to be innocent, if they were ever indicted at all. No wonder the
Osages refused to participate in such “justice.” Only when they could no
longer evade surrender of a wanted Osage would they participate.

Article Eleven is a companion to Article Nine in that it authorizes
Osages to arrest intruders and turn them over to American authorities.
If the Osages acted under this Article, they became embroiled in claims
against themselves, and the intruders would be released with apologies. The
intruder problem was never solved. The government either could not or
would not keep intruders off the reservations. To make matters worse, the
government would not cooperate with the Osages to oust intruders.

There were one hundred twenty Osage leaders listed as signers of the
Fire Prairie version of the treaty and fifteen Osage signers of the Arkansas
version. The phonics of the names in the Fire Prairie version are very poor
and those in the Arkansas version are not much better. This indicates more
than a minor communication problem. Pierre Chouteau must have been
the interpreter of the former, because the person who inscribed the names
on the document wrote ragged French. The French phonics of the names
are bad.

Two factors suggest a poor comprehension of the Osage language in
writing. First, the French sounds of the syllables rarely match the sounds in
the Osage language, nor do they match with any known Osage names,
which are centuries old and still used today. It is unlikely that some of them
would not appear on a list of one hundred twenty names.

Second, no interpreted names follow the Osage name. In such long lists,
it was customary to give interpreted names for the major chiefs and the
position or band of the others. Only positions and bands are given in this
list. It is evident from these names that whoever acted as interpreter was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

156 / Treaties and Land Cessions

either less than fluent in Osage or they were more comfortable with English
than with French. Thus, the difficult task of translating complex American
legal concepts from English, through French, and then into Osage was ac¬
cepted as legally understandable.

The Arkansas version shows a greater comprehension of Osage in the
names. Since the two Osage interpreters, Noel Mongrain and Bazil Nassier
(Naseur), signed by their marks, we assume they were illiterate. John P.
Gates, the other interpreter, probably wrote the names on the document.
The phonics are in English and the syllables match known Osage names.
While the phonics are not good, the names are recognizable. The inter¬
preted names and positions show an excellent knowledge of Osage.

Noel Mongrain was married to Marie Pahushan, who was White Hair s
oldest daughter. 14 The son of Basil Naseur, John Basil Nasuer, married
Seraphine Estis. 15 Their baptism and marriage records are in French and
undoubtedly these people were more comfortable with French than with
English. While the two Osage interpreters were fluent in French and Osage,
their comprehension of English was probably not very extensive. Hence,
John P. Gates probably acted as French-English interpreter. After filtering
the provisions of the Treaty of 1808 through three languages, it is doubtful
that a clear understanding of the treaty was obtained by the Arkansas bands.
It would strain the imagination to believe mere coincidence could have
placed almost every possible barrier in the way of both groups of Osages
understanding the key provisions of the treaty.

The Treaty of 1815

The Treaty of 1815 (7 Stat. 133) was a very short, clear treaty. It consisted
of a preamble and three short Articles. In essence, it simply reaffirmed the
status quo ante helium (situation before the War of 1812). That is,it reaffirmed
loyalty between the Osages and the United States, as well as continued all
existing treaties between the two nations. There were twenty-four Osages
who “touched the feather” (signed) and three Euro-American Commis¬
sioners.

The phonics are good and are in English. Evidently, Auguste Chouteau
acted as a Commissioner and Noel Mongrain as interpreter. Interpretation
of the names are also given. Iron Hawk’s name is especially significant be¬
cause it shows a very good comprehension of the Osages. Gra to Moll se is
usually interpreted as Iron Hawk but the name applies to a specific kind of
hawk which in English is called KITE. Thus, when Gra to Moll se was in¬
terpreted as Iron Kite in the Treaty of 1815, it shows the interpreter had an
excellent command of the Osage language and culture. Whoever recorded

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 157

the name also had a good command of both languages because the phonics
are clear and the interpretations accurately recorded.

It is either strange or possibly intentional that excellent comprehension
was available for this simple treaty. It would seem that when a complex
treaty full of concessions to the United States was involved, every possi¬
bility for misunderstanding was present. On the other hand, simple treaties
with clear provisions are clearly communicated. This is indeed strange, if
coincidental, but one must suspect that coincidence was given more than a
little assistance when officials suspected the Osages would not accept some
provisions.

The Treaty of 1818

Two of the vexing problems facing both the United States and the Osages
brought about the Treaty of i8i8.Both of these problems arose from intrud¬
ers. In the first instance, it was Euro-American intruders, and in the second
case it was emigrant Indian intruders. Under their understanding of the
Treaty of 1808, the Arkansas bands attempted to deal with these intruders
in their own way. While no Euro-Americans were killed for intruding into
these Osage hunting areas, property of various kinds was taken. 16 The sei¬
zure of property was probably in retaliation for property stolen from the
Osages. Since it was easier to recover claims from the less-experienced
Osages than it was from the more-experienced emigrant Indians, many of
these claims were actually due to emigrant Indian thefts.

The “claims game” was not practiced by the Osages until much later in
time. However, the emigrant nations of the southeast had perfected their
methods to the point where it had become an exact science. It was not
unusual for Cherokee claims against Euro-Americans to exceed Euro-
American claims against the Cherokee. Being considered as a “civilized
tribe” by virtue of a long association with Americans, the so-called five
civilized tribes took full advantage of their status. They filed claims against
the Osages on the slightest pretext. If they could not find an excuse to file
a claim, they created one. Part of the game was to cast the Osages into the
role of wild uncivilized Indians.

Americans were more than willing to accept this characterization of the
Osages because the five tribes were from the Americans’ old homeland and
the Osages were buffalo Indians. The Osage habit of solving their problems
by themselves prevented a formal Euro-American type of response to thefts
by Euro-Americans and the five tribes. Thus, the traditional Osage responses
left them open to innumerable claims. Lack of Osage formal response not
only tended to strengthen the validity of the claims against them, but it also
heightened the stereotype of the Osages as a wild, stupid Indian nation.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

158 / Treaties and Land Cessions

The Osages had an excellent comprehension of trade goods and their
value in terms of furs and hides. But they had no concept of money, its uses,
or its value. Thus, the money paid to settle claims as provided in treaties had
no meaning for them. They were aware that past claims were settled, but
they did not realize what it had cost them until much later.

While the Treaty of 1808 had provided for a north-south line from Fort
Osage due south to the Arkansas River (Fort Smith), the Osages misunder¬
stood the function of the line. The fact that the Osages were not to hunt east
of this line was hidden in complicated wording. The Osage understanding
was that until the area to the east was settled or assigned to some other
Indian nation, it was to remain Osage hunting territory. This misunder¬
standing was not corrected until 1825. Meanwhile,between 1808 and 1818,
the Cherokee were increasingly crossing to the west side of the Osage line
to hunt. While these actions were deliberate violations of the Treaty of 1808,
the United States authorities ignored the Cherokee intrusions into Osage
territory and punished the Osages for protecting their legal domain against
the Cherokee intruders. The area west of the Osage line was not only legal
Osage territory under Osage law, but by virtue of the Treaty of 1808 it was
also legally Osage area under United States law.

Fort Smith was founded in 1817 not to keep the Cherokees east of the
Osage line but to keep the Osages from driving the Cherokees out of
the legal Osage territory. 17 In 1824, Fort Gibson was founded for much the
same reason. Like the United States government, some writers have been
more sympathetic to the Cherokee in this matter than to the Osage. Yet, in
fairness, they do usually mention that the Cherokee was the intruder. The
Osages had every justification for attacking the Cherokee and driving them
out of an area that even by American law belonged to the Osages. This was
an Osage area by prior occupation and by Indian law as well as by American
law. How then can anyone make the Cherokee intruders and provokers of
attacks the heroes and make the owners and defenders of their lands the
villains? This nonconformity to the evidence is confusing and more than a
little irrational.

The truth of the matter is that, since the last half of the 1700s, the Chero¬
kee had longed for the choice parts of the Osage domain. They could not
accomplish this by force of arms, although they outnumbered the Osages.
First, they tried to get the Spanish to acquire Osage territory for them, but
the Spanish were too weak to accomplish this. By 1816, the Cherokee had
so aroused the government against the Osages that they could get almost
anything they wanted. As an added inducement, the American government
had promised the western Cherokee that they would receive an outlet so
they could hunt buffalo on the Plains. 18

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 159

Subsequent events clearly show that it was not only an outlet the Chero¬
kee wanted. If it were only an outlet they desired, the most practical route
for the Cherokee to reach the Plains was between the Red and Canadian
Rivers. The next most logical route was along the Arkansas and Cimarron
Rivers. Following the Neosho-Grand northward and then turning west to
the Plains was the worst possible route to the Plains from the Cherokee area
east of Fort Smith. Clearly the Cherokee wanted more than an outlet.

What the Cherokee wanted and ultimately acquired was the lush Neo¬
sho and Verdigris valleys. The United States obtained this for them at the
expense of the Osages. What the Cherokee and Spaniards could not do, the
United States accomplished. The Treaty of 1818 was the second step in
the outlet scheme. Regardless of what one may think of the Cherokees,
one must admit they were shrewd and well organized in achieving their
purpose.

The first step in the outlet scheme was to oust the Osages from the Three
Forks or lower Neosho-Grand and Verdigris area. Ina Gabler describes the
first step very well:

Early in July, 1816, at the mouth of the Verdigris River, Major
William Lovely, Cherokee agent in Missouri Territory, presided over a
conference between representatives of the Osage and Cherokee tribes.

He proposed to the Osages, who had exhibited great hostility to¬
ward the Cherokees, that the federal government would pay all claims
against them for depredations they had committed if they would cede
to the United States their land lying between the falls of the Verdigris
and the eastern Osage line of 1808. Lovely’s idea was that Osage aban¬
donment of this large area of country would leave it free for the
Cherokees to hunt over in peace. The Osage chieftains agreed to this
on July 9, and thereafter this immense tract of land, approximately
three million acres in extent, became known as Lovely’s Purchase. 19

Lovely had no authority from the United States government to make
this agreement. While Lovely’s agreement was never officially recognized,
the Treaty of 1818 followed the Lovely agreement, and thus, in essence, af¬
firmed the earlier pact even though Lovely had nothing to do with making
the treaty of 1818. It seems the United States saw an opportunity to utilize
a concession already made. The difference was that it made the cession bind¬
ing under the Constitution. Thus, the Osages were the victim of an illegal
treaty made legal to benefit other Indians.

One very significant point must be noted, since it has never been men¬
tioned in the literature about this treaty. Under the 1808 treaty, the Osages

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

160 / Treaties and Land Cessions

were guaranteed hunting rights on all unassigned lands west of the Osage
line. The Cherokees did not buy the cession of 1818 from either the Osages
or the United States, nor was the land assigned to them except as an outlet
to the Plains. Secretary of War John C. Calhoun on October 8, 1821, no¬
tified the Cherokee that they did not own this land and had only the right
of passage. 20 The Osages never disputed the Cherokee right of passage
through this cession but they rightfully asserted their hunting rights when
the Cherokee hunted in the cession. This is a clear case of the United States
knowingly forcing the Osages to accept a treaty violation.

The Treaty of 1822

The Treaty of 1822 was a simple, short treaty. It closed Fort Osage as a
government factory by abrogating the second Article of the Treaty of 1808.
Thus, the first government factory west of the Mississippi was closed. For
allowing the end of the federal factory at Fort Osage, the Osages were paid
a total of $2,329.40 in merchandise. This was probably the total supply of
merchandise on hand at Fort Osage.

All three of the Osage tribes were represented among the signatures. The
main chiefs who signed were White Hair of the Missouri Big Hills, Trav¬
eling Rain of the Little Osages and Town Maker (Claremore II) of the Ar¬
kansas Big Hills. Evidently, Paul Baillio (Belieu) and Robert Dunlap were
the interpreters while the Agent of Indian Affairs, Richard Graham, was in
charge. A notable witness was Fr. Charles de la Croix. The Jesuits and priests
had worked among the Osages for sometime so Fr. de la Croix was trusted
by the Osages.

The First Treaty of 1825

Two Osage treaties were made in 1825. The first of these contained many
far-reaching concessions by the Osage, and the second is commonly known
as the Council Grove Treaty. We will refer to the first 1825 treaty as the
Treaty of 1825 and the second as the Council Grove Treaty. Like the Treaty
of 1818, the Treaty of 1825 was brought about because of intrusions by
Euro-Americans and the southeastern emigrant nations. Although the land
cessions of these treaties will be dealt with in a later section of this chapter,
it is necessary to touch on two related matters here.

Our first land consideration is the Cherokee Outlet and that portion of
the Outlet known as the Cherokee Strip. All Cherokee territory west of the
Mississippi came to them through Osage land cessions to the United States.
With the exception of that ceded in 1818, all Cherokee land claims in
Oklahoma came from the Osage cession of 1825. The so-called Cherokee

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 161

Outlet, well known in general histories, was Osage territory ceded to the
United States in 1825.

In 1872, the Osages bought back a portion of the Outlet lying between
the 96th Meridian and the Arkansas River (17 Stat. 228). The north line was
the 37th parallel (Kansas-Oklahoma state line) and the south line was
formed by the Arkansas River plus the north line of the Creek nation. The
extreme northwest corner of this tract was sold to the Kansas nation by the
Osages (see Fig. 21).

A widespread misunderstanding of the term Cherokee Strip is evident in
the way it is used. In popular usage, the term is applied to the Cherokee
Outlet, which lies entirely within the bounds of the state of Oklahoma.
But in actuality, the Cherokee Strip lies entirely within the bounds of the
state of Kansas. Article Two of the Treaty of 1825 sets the east, west, and
north-south lines of the Osage reservation from the location of White
Hairs Village. In 1825, White Hair’s Village was located on the Neosho and
across that river from Shaw, Kansas. Location of all boundaries in the Treaty
of 1825 are keyed to a point due east of this village and twenty-five miles
west of Missouri’s western boundary. The Osage southern boundary was
forty miles south of this point.

Although it was thought that this southern Osage boundary would fall
on the 37th parallel, it fell short by somewhat less than two miles. Also,
because of a surveying error, the line between Kansas and Oklahoma is
slightly less than one-half mile south of the actual 37th parallel. Therefore,
the north boundary of the Cherokee Outlet and south boundary of the
Osage reservation were a short two and one-half miles north of the Kansas-
Oklahoma line. This somewhat less than two and one-half mile wide strip
extended from twenty-five miles west of Missouri to the 100th Meridian.
All of this strip lies in Kansas and is correctly called the Cherokee Strip. The
area west of the Strip and Outlet (Oklahoma Panhandle) was called No
Man’s Land. This name is also sometimes applied to the portion of the Strip
that lies east of the Arkansas River. That same area east of the Arkansas is
often called Lap Land because of the overlapping one-half-mile strip.

One cannot help but see a great deal of irony in the Osage-Cherokee
situation. The Cherokee used a favorable United States government and in¬
truders to acquire Osage lands on the Neosho-Grand and Verdigris. Yet, after
1863, the United States became friendlier to the Osages, and intruders
gained control of the Cherokee lands on the Neosho-Grand and Verdigris. 21
The Osages profited through the Cherokee experience with intruders.

An unusual feature of Article Two was the provision for a buffer zone
between the Euro-Americans and the Osages. We may be in error, but we

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 21. Note the relative location of features on this map.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 163

believe this is the only time the federal government tried this solution to
the intruder problem. A strip twenty-five-miles wide, east and west, and
fifty-miles long, north and south, was created between Missouri’s west
boundary and the Osages. Of course, the Osages donated the land for this
buffer zone, and only Osage mixed-bloods could legally live in this zone.
In 1835, these Osage Neutral Lands were assigned to the Cherokee by the
federal government. From the entries in the Osage Mission Register, it is
evident that many Euro-Americans, mixed-blood Osages, and mixed-blood
Cherokees lived in these so-called Cherokee Neutral Lands, including a siz¬
able band of Quapaw. 22

This same Article Two contains an interesting version of “as long as the
grass grows and the waters flow” idea. In this version, the concept, “so long
as they may choose to occupy the same” is stated. But guess who chose to
have the Osages cede the rich Neosho Valley in Kansas and a ten-mile strip
off the north part of “the same”? We must admit that the Diminished Re¬
serve (the remainder of “the same”) was ceded by the choice of the Osages,
although it was, of course, a choice between ceding the Diminished Re¬
serve or being declared “an enemy of the United States.”

While these satirical barbs are true enough, it would be unjust to let
them stand without mitigation. The Neutral Lands idea was a failure from
the outset. Euro-American intruders entered the zone without hindrance
and spilled over into the Osage Reserve with equal ease. More area was
needed for the “checker game” of moving the emigrant nations of the
northeast from square to square. Thus, the Neosho and Ten Mile Strip ces¬
sions became necessary. We will go into more detail about these events later.

Article Four is a classic example of good intentions missing the mark.
Clearly, the livestock and implements provided here were intended to start
the Osages on the road to agriculture and “civilization.” If either side un¬
derstood the others culture, it was not evident in this provision. From the
American view, the Osages had to become farmers so they could fit into the
American culture. The Osages could see no need to farm when they could
trade one buffalo robe for a year’s supply of corn. Furthermore, they had no
inclination to merge with the American culture that they considered to be
inferior to their own.

This same problem was also present in Article Six. Fifty-four square
miles of the ceded lands were set aside to be sold to establish an Osage
education fund. In later years this was called the Civilization Fund, al¬
though it was only one portion of the total fund. It is interesting that the
President was to determine how the Osage children were to be educated.
This meant that Osage education would be determined by American con¬
cepts of what they should be taught. While many aspects of cultural differ-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

164 / Treaties and Land Cessions

ences generate educational problems, none are more noticeable than the
determination of relevancy. What is relevant to the President or to an
American missionary is not necessarily relevant to an Osage. That is, the
Osages had certain things they wanted their children to learn in the Euro-
American schools, and these things were not always in agreement with what
was taught.

It was a matter of cultural ethnocentrism for the Americans to assume
the Osages would want to be totally educated in American culture. The
Osages desired education in order to improve their existing culture; the
American idea was to destroy Osage culture and replace it with American
culture. The ability to see their own cultural weaknesses and to seek to
improve their culture by borrowing from the Osages was never applied by
the Americans toward the Osage culture in any formal way. Yet, there were
American adaptations of Osage ways. These were so subtle that they passed
unnoticed and unrecognized as being borrowed from the Osages. Except
in education and official policy, the two cultures did merge and create a
unique American character. It was not so much the meeting of Western
civilization and wilderness that created the frontier spirit as it was the meet¬
ing of two vibrant cultures. It is a shame that the blending of the two has
been so diluted with the passing influence of the Indian.

Articles Seven, Eight, and Nine are all part of the “claims game.” In Ar¬
ticle Seven, the United States government wanted full release from the
Treaty of 1808 and so used traders’ claims as the means of escape. The in¬
truding Delaware and Euro-Americans got their benefits in Articles Eight
and Nine. It would be interesting to examine these claims in detail, but
space will not permit a detailed examination.

In many respects, Article Ten was a violation of trust responsibilities held
by the government. Harmony Mission was to have two sections reserved to
it and Union Mission one section. These were to be sold and reestablished
in the reduced Osage reserve. While some minor missions were established,
by 1837 all these missions were abandoned and the funds diverted to other
missions. Thus, Osage Mission was poorly funded and was financed by the
Osages and the Catholic Church. Funds that should have been available
through Article Ten had been either diverted or dissipated.

The Council Grove Treaty

The Council Grove Treaty was one of a series of treaties to clear the way
for the Santa Fe Trail. For the main part, it sought protection from Osage
raids for travelers on the trail. At this time, 1823, Council Grove, near the
headwaters of the Neosho River, was in Osage territory. The name of
Council Grove originates from this treaty with the Osages.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Treaties and Land Cessions / 165

We cannot identify any leaders of the Arkansas bands among the Osage
signers. Ki he ka Wa ti an ka (Saucy Chief) is identified as Foolish Chief, but
the other names are very clear, and they are all from either the Little Osage
or White Hair bands.

The Treaty of 1839

Payments under the Treaty of 1839 were mainly in articles useless to the
Osages but profitable to the suppliers. With a drastic reduction in their win¬
ter hunting grounds, the Osage living standard was greatly lowered. Closer
associations with more Euro-Americans led to epidemics that eventually
destroyed the Osage resistance to intruders. The Treaty of 1839 struck the
Arkansas bands especially hard for it required their removal to Kansas and
the cession of all Osage lands in Oklahoma. The present reservation was
bought back from this cession in 1872.

Certainly, the annuity payments provided for some latitude in method of
payment, so some benefit did devolve to the Osage people. It is also worth
noting that funds that were not used to pay claims were returned to the
Osages. However, one may look upon the return of the residual as an act of
honesty, even if all the claims were not valid. The increasing special bene¬
fits to Osage leaders suggests a rising discontent among the rank and file
Osages. Thus, the Americans were having to provide greater incentives for
the leaders.

To give some idea of how Osage treaty benefits were perverted, we need
only to look at the blacksmith and striker (blacksmiths helper) provisions
in this treaty. R. A. Calloway, the Osage subagent, appointed John Mathews
and Edward Lother as blacksmiths under this treaty. But, although they
drew the pay, they rendered no service. To add insult to injury, Mathews’s
seven-year-old son and a small Negro slave were appointed to the striker
positions. 23 Such practices were common, but more than anything else it
shows how utterly absent the trust responsibility, so glibly proclaimed as a
right by the government, became in practice.

LAND CESSIONS
Introduction

The entire question of Indian land cessions is an involved matter that has
no academic solution and a debatable legal solution. In the actual legal prac¬
tice, all American land titles ultimately rest on Euro-American concepts of
justice, and no Indian concept is allowed to override Anglo-American law.
The nearest combination of Indian and Euro-American land law is con¬
tained in the Osage Allotment Act of 1906 (34,pt i,Stat, 539),in which the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

166 / Treaties and Land Cessions

surface of the land was allotted under Euro-American law, but the minerals
were held in common under Osage law.

One cannot claim the Indian land title was extinguished by any order of
law. In a few rare cases some form of Western-style legal order was followed.
These exceptions are noticeable because of their scarcity. With few excep¬
tions, Indian land titles were usually obtained by chicanery of all kinds,
coercion, flattery, bribery, false claims, and seldom by outright conquest.
Many justifications were offered for seizing Indian lands, but the fact re¬
mains that Indian lands were taken without any real right and with com¬
pensations that were insulting in their insignificance.

With such a blunt statement, we can see little purpose in harping on the
obvious. A wrong was committed that destroyed a way of life. Little choice
remains but to rectify the wrongs as well as possible and to salvage as much
as we can of a way of life that has joined the ages.

Our purpose in showing the land cessions is to show the process of de¬
struction. Osage culture was a culture of the sky and earth. Loss of either
meant the destruction of the culture. These cessions were more than mere
yielding of territory. Along with the cessions went the sacred animals and
the responsibility for protecting the land. Thus, each cession weakened the
Osage spirit and limited their food base. Dispirited and undernourished, the
Osages were increasingly vulnerable to assaults on their lands and culture.

There were four Osage land cessions between 1804 and 1850. These were
the cessions of 1808 (see Fig. 22), 1818,1825, and 1839. One often reads that
the government gave a reservation to some Indian group. We have never
attempted to verify these statements except where they were applied to the
Osages. Invariably, such writers simply did not know any better or used
such statements as a convenience to avoid explaining the facts. We will state
clearly and with no limitations that the United States government did not
give the Osages any reservation at any time. Every reservation the Osages
occupied was their own territory long before the United States had any real
or imagined claim to it. The present reservation was bought and paid for by
the Osages. However, it had been Osage territory long before it was ceded
to the United States.

The Land Cession of 1808

There were three basic tracts ceded by the Osages in 1808. The largest of
these lay between the Missouri River on the north and the Arkansas River
on the south. With the Mississippi River on the east and a line drawn from
Fort Osage to Fort Smith as the western boundary, this was a sizable cession.
The second tract was a two-league parcel for Fort Osage. A third tract dis¬
solved any Osage claims north of the Missouri River to the Iowa state line.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

22. The three cessions of 1808 are shown on this adaptation of Royce’s maps.

168 / Treaties and Land Cessions

Half of Arkansas, or 26,000 square miles (16,640,000 acres), was ceded.
Seven-eighths of Missouri, or 56,000 square miles (35,840,000 acres) were
ceded. The cession was at least 52,480,000 acres. 24 Considering that all
forms of compensation for these lands totaled less than one-sixth of a cent
per acre, it is reasonable to suspect that someone was cheated. One may ar¬
gue good intentions and a thousand other justifications, but one fact still
stands out, this cannot be called just compensation.

The Land Cession of 1818

The land cession of 1818 confirmed what had been called Lovely Purchase
(see Fig. 23). Approximately 600,000 acres were mainly a clearing of claims
that the Osages held to reservation areas claimed by other Indians. By con¬
trast, in 1825, 20,000 square miles in Kansas, 18,000 square miles in Okla¬
homa, 6,000 square miles in Missouri, and 1,000 square miles in Arkansas
were ceded to the government.

There were notable omissions in this cession, as well as that of 1839. First,
the solid Osage claim south to the Red River is ignored, as is their claims
south of the Arkansas to Natchitoches, Louisiana. Next, the Osage claims
ceded in Arkansas and 1,200,000 acres in Oklahoma are omitted by this
cession. As compensation for these 1,800,000 acres of land, the United
States paid claims against the Osages up to $4,000. This would be about
four and one-half cents per acre. Since these lands were immediately sold to
the Cherokee for $2,000,000, one cannot help noticing a great discrepancy
in this transaction. Such actions surely justify Osage doubts about the desire
of the United States to look after their interests, their so-called “trust obli¬
gation.”

The Land Cessions of 1825-1839

The cession of 1825 was the last big land cession the Osages made between
1804 and 1850 (see Fig. 24). The cession of 1839 west of the 100th Meridian
is understandable because that area was in dispute with Spain and Mexico.
Yet, the firm Osage claim to areas west of the 100th were never settled, even
after the Mexican-American War cleared the United States claim to this
area. William Clarks map of Osage territory and the Spanish records clearly
establish a valid Osage claim to these areas. 25

In this period, 1804-1850, the Osages ceded 96,800,000 acres of their
territory to the United States. For this, they were paid in all forms of com¬
pensation $166,300 or approximately five and three-quarter cents per acre.
While the monetary injustice inherent in these cessions is obvious, it was
the spiritual and physical damage to the Osages that was so crucial. There is
no way an assessment of spiritual damage can be made. We know the burden

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 23. The Lovely Purchase cession (adapted from Royce).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 24 After the cession of 1825 the Osages only had a shadow of their territory left (map by Royce).

Treaties and Land Cessions / 171

of guilt carried by the Osages was great. They had betrayed Wa kon ta s trust
and given over the little brothers to a strange people. To what extent the
retribution for this act affected the Osages we cannot know. We do have
signs that new roads were being explored because the very base of Osage
religion was shaken. The foundation of Osage civilization was crumbling.
Hence, Osage resistance to the catastrophic flood of American people and
emigrant Indians was weakened.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Indian State

and Removal

THE INDIAN STATE
Background

The origin of the idea of the Indian state is difficult to pinpoint. Certainly,
the British had toyed with the idea of creating a province made up of self-
governing Indian people. While the idea was not necessarily bad, it met
considerable opposition from Indian and Euro-American alike. From the
Indian viewpoint, no nation was willing to cede leadership to another na¬
tion. The situation would be the same as trying to get all the nations in the
world to unify under a single potent government and to abandon their ex¬
isting governments.

Euro-Americans were opposed to the idea for a variety of reasons. These
ranged from fears of a truly unified Indian population to a firm belief in
assimilation of Indians into the general population. There is some indication
that Indian removal, the reservation system, and the Indian state were all
interwoven in a random, varied, United States Indian policy.

Insofar as United States history is concerned, the Treaty of Fort Pitt with
the Delaware in 1778 was the first provision for an Indian state. 1 Under this
treaty, the Delaware could lead other nations into the formation of a state
that Congress could admit to the Confederation. Since neither the Delaware
nor the Euro-Americans pushed the matter, no steps were taken to imple¬
ment the idea. Like so many schemes involving Indians, the Indian state idea
was based on the very real fact of Indian sovereignty. While after the
United States became a powerful nation Indian sovereignty was a legal
fiction, through her early history such sovereignty was very real. Thus, the
Indian state would have avoided special sovereignty status for Indians.

The acquisition of Louisiana opened several new possibilities to solving
Indian problems. Colonization of Indians was not a new idea, since it had
been practiced since the late-160os. Louisiana presented the new idea of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 173

removal to areas out of the path of American expansion. Spain had used this
to some extent, but Thomas Jefferson envisioned large scale removal. How¬
ever, Indian reluctance to leave their traditional lands limited voluntary re¬
moval.

The “Indian Problem”

It may be prudent to look at the “Indian problem.” First and foremost, one
must bear in mind that Indian cultures of the woodlands and plains were
primarily hunting cultures. So long as Euro-American contacts with Indi¬
ans harmonized within the framework of hunting cultures, very little fric¬
tion was generated. Failure to respect the laws of hunting cultures did cost
some Euro-Americans their lives but only when those laws were violated.
Great friction arose with the intrusion of agriculture into hunting territory.
A hunting culture and an agrarian culture could not coexist in the same
area simultaneously.

Thus, as settlers moved more and more into new plow areas, the game left
the area. In hunting cultures, poaching and destruction of hunting grounds
were extremely serious crimes. Therefore, the punishment for such intrusion
was especially brutal and severe. The Osage practice of decapitation and
placing the heads on stakes was typical. Free passage of the land was also a
law of hunting cultures. Personal ownership of land and control of passage
over the owned land was not understood by a hunting people.

These and other differences led to friction wherever a settlers clearing
appeared in the Indians hunting territory. From the Euro-American view
these were unused, vacant lands and as such were available for settlement. We
would add to Frederic Jackson Turner’s description of the frontier line as the
meeting place of the axe and the bow—one was the symbol of the clearing
and the other the symbol of the hunt.

The Osages

As each successive wave of settlers moved west, they compacted the game
and the Indians into a smaller and smaller area. This in turn set up a shock
wave of pressure on the Indians west of those Indians impacted by the set¬
tlers. The expanding waves of contact shock were felt by the Osages long
before they received the first shock of settlement. Thus, the Osages have had
a long history of problems with emigrant Indian nations.

Their vast domain was an attraction to the voluntary emigrant Indians.
Yet, the Osage defense of their lands discouraged many groups from emi¬
grating. Since this ran counter to United States’ policy, the Osage problem
had to be dealt with even before settlers appeared in any numbers. The ma¬
jor source of Osage irritation to the Spanish was the warring on other na-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

174 / Indian State and Removal

tions that prevented the full use of resources and trade. For American au¬
thorities, the major Osage irritation was the warring on the eastern Indian
nations that deterred them from voluntarily moving west of the Mississippi.

Such actions not only hampered the ideas of removal and reservation, but
they also pointed to the difficulty of creating an Indian state. There were
four solutions that evolved from the Indian question. One was to annihilate
the Indians. Another was to confine them to reservations. A third was to
create an Indian state, and a final solution was to incorporate Indians into
the general population. Without a doubt, the Osages affected all four of
these.

President Jefferson gave no hint that he ever intended to create an Indian
state. However, his idea of the removal and concentration of Indians in the
Osage territory could easily have led to organizing an Indian state. Jeffer¬
son left no clue as to whether this was his intent. His main interest seems
to have been removing Indians from the path of westward expansion.
Congress, on the other hand, made no secret of its interest in the Indian
state idea.

House resolutions of December 17,1824, and December 27,1825, clearly
stated the intention to create an Indian Territory that was to be governed
like any other American Territory and subject to the same requirements for
admission to statehood. 2 Senator Benton of Missouri introduced a bill into
the Senate that set forth the creation of a territory, made up of Indians, that
would ultimately become an Indian state. While the bill passed the Senate,
it did not pass in the House.

The Cherokee fought every attempt to organize Indian Territory as a
regular territory. Their great fear was the loss of sovereignty. As a territory
made up of sovereign Indian nations, the territory was more accurately
termed Indian Country. Under territorial organization, each Indian nation
would necessarily have to cede their sovereignty to the territorial govern¬
ment. Yet, as the question of merging Indian Territory with Oklahoma Ter¬
ritory arose, some Cherokees opposed the merger because they had reached
a point where they hoped for an Indian state.

At this point, the Osages entered the question. They had refused to join
the so-called five civilized nations because the Cherokee controlled the
confederation. Now, faced with a real possibility of being forced into a
white man’s state, an Indian state, even under Cherokee domination, became
more appealing. In the meantime, the Cherokee returned to their earlier
position of opposition to the Indian state, leaving the Osages as the last In¬
dian nation to champion the cause of the Indian state. Failing to attain this
goal, the Osages did the next best thing, from their viewpoint. To get the
Osage assent to add the Osage reservation to the newly merged Oklahoma

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 175

Territory and Indian Territory, the entire reservation was to be created as
one county.

INDIAN REMOVAL
Origin of the Idea

Removal as a policy or as an idea did not originate with Thomas Jefferson
in 1803. President Jefferson introduced the concept into American practices
with the Louisiana Purchase, 3 but the French had used voluntary removal as
early as 1709. 4 Removal was also a regular feature of Spanish policy in the
Mississippi Valley between 1763 and 1794. 5

The term itself, removal, is a broad term that covers several objectives. It
may be used to establish colonies of Indians; to clear the way for other
peoples; to break up possible confederacies; or to consolidate a people into
a compact area. The term also denotes any contrived migration. Thus, any
action that alters natural migration may be considered to be a removal. Fur¬
thermore, a removal may be either voluntary or involuntary.

While American removal policies were at times all these things, we tend
to associate the term with the consolidation of Indians into increasingly
smaller areas. Correctly or incorrectly, we also tend to associate removal
with coercion and trickery. Certainly, the Louisiana Purchase caused drastic
changes in American Indian policy. For the first time, the federal govern¬
ment had a vast area without any territorial or state strings attached to it. It
follows that some Indian policy would evolve from this situation.

As Annie Heloise Abel noted in 1906 that the Louisiana Purchase has
been studied in almost all conceivable ways, yet no one has pointed out its
relationship to Indian policy. 6 The majority culture and many ethnic groups
have so overshadowed the American Indian cultures that Americans of the
1990s have difficulty realizing how strong the Indian influence has been.
Yet the documents in American history show an Indian influence in every
Euro-American event up to 1890. There are several reasons why the Indian
influence is so widely ignored in the history of the United States.

In terms of proportionate population, Indians, as a whole, constitute a
small minority group. This small proportionate share in the population
causes a diluted political voice because the total Indian population is frag¬
mented by differences among themselves. That is, each Indian nation has its
own hatchet to grind and, thus, Indian unity is absent as a political bloc. An
often overlooked factor in Indian influence is the rapid decline of full-blood
stock or the gene pool of Indian blood.

At least two types of Osage full-bloods exist. A few Osages are actually
full-blood Osage while others are full-blood Indian. The distinction here is

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

176 / Indian State and Removal

that a person may be full-blood Indian and still be only a small fraction
Osage. Mixed-bloods among the full-bloods and near full-bloods are almost
as common among Indian nations as mixed-bloods between the New and
Old World peoples. Instead of bringing unity among the merged peoples, a
system of divided loyalties often evolves in the offspring. We will touch on
this problem later, but it has to be mentioned here as a problem in Indian
influence.

The United States is rapidly becoming a country in which the majority
rules despite injustices to minorities. A minority with an effective voice can
still attain justice, but the trend is to follow the majority interest where the
minority does not have political clout. Thus, cultural influence and political
clout go hand in hand. Without either, Indians stand impotent to defend
themselves against the excesses of the majority. This is all too evident in the
passing of the Indian influence on American culture.

Removal was a primary policy of eradicating Indian influence in Ameri¬
can society. In some respects, the basic rationale for removal still exists today.
That is, Indians are nomadic in nature and, thus, it would be of little conse¬
quence to remove them to another place. 7 While this rationale was based
on observation, it must be noted that both the observation and conclusion
drawn from the observation are flawed.

A hunting culture by its nature must follow the game and disperse as the
group increases in population. The more dependent on hunting a culture
becomes, the more accurate these facts become. Thus, a pure hunting cul¬
ture would be more constantly on the move in small family groups than a
hunting culture tempered by gathering and agriculture. Since none of the
Woodland Indians, such as the Osages, were solely a hunting people, their
nomadic tendency was limited. That is, they always had permanent villages
where they returned after hunts. Varying degrees of agriculture were prac¬
ticed around these villages. More important were the gathering-resources
available around the villages.

Removal and the Osages

If the Osages, and other Indian nations like them, were nomadic, consider
the Euro-Americans. Most had left their European homeland and voyaged
over three thousand miles of sea and a thousand miles of land to reach the
Osage territory. Native-born Euro-Americans were constantly on the move
and rarely settled more than a few years in the same place. Surely, this was
true of frontier Americans. One may argue that the New England merchant
and Southern planter were sedentary. However, both often made protracted
business trips both within North America and abroad. Saying these were
mere business trips begs the question that the Osage hunting trips were also

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 177

business trips. One may in candor ask, Who were the nomads, the Osages or
the Euro-Americans?

Assuming the nomad and unused-lands argument was valid, another
question must be asked. Why were the home villages or the most heavily
used areas the first to be taken by Euro-Americans? These were occupied
areas, even under the measurements of Western civilization. Osage removal
was as devastating to them as the removal of any other Indian nation. While
conclusive evidence of the effects of earlier removals are cloudy, we have
clear evidence of the effects of the 1870 removal.

The Annuity Rolls of 1878 show few children survived the 1870-1875
period. This same trend is shown in the age groupings for 1822-1827. Be¬
tween 1865-1870, both children and their mothers evidently died in vast
numbers. Their absence on the Annuity Rolls bears testimony to the rigor
of removal. 8 Yet, despite these facts, Indians, such as the Osage, were removed
repeatedly (See Fig. 25).

Removal and Jefferson

While Jefferson introduced the removal idea into American government in
1803, it was some years before the idea became government policy. There
were too many other problems demanding the attention of the young na¬
tion to allow an interest in Indian removal. Jefferson quite possibly turned
to removal because of the Georgia Compact of 1802.

This compact between the United States and Georgia settled the west¬
ern land claims of Georgia. Thus, title to what became Alabama and Mis¬
sissippi passed to the United States. Our primary interest in this compact is
the price the United States paid to Georgia. The United States promised
that it would, at its own expense, extinguish the Indian title to all lands
within the boundaries of Georgia as soon as possible. 9

The significance of this agreement should not be overlooked when con¬
sidering the United States’ Indian land policy. Emerging from the Georgia
Compact of 1802 is the basic Indian land policy followed by the United
States. Out of the need to meet the obligations of the compact, Jefferson
introduced the removal idea into American Indian Affairs.

Sectionalism was potentially involved in the compact and, consequently,
in the resultant Indian policy formulation. As a section, the South had a
heavy Indian population. The Northeast also had an Indian population, but
it was evidently smaller than that of the South. More significant than the
population size was the tendency of the Southern Indians to unify as an
effective force. While the Northeastern Indians attempted several confed¬
erations, all these tended to disperse under conflict. 1 "

Possibly, the Indians in the South could have had as much bearing on the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

178 / Indian State and Removal

Osage Age Groups in 1878

TOTAL IN EACH AGE GROUP

IEJ3

►

(1878) I

■

□

(187

■

□

(1870)

►

■

►

(1 865) II

►

■

1 860)

■

No.

EE3

El«!

Fig. 25. Adapted from Burns, The Osage Annuity Rolls of 1878.

slow population growth of the section as the presence of slavery. The pre¬
vailing view of the slow Southern growth is that slavery discouraged the
small family farmer and thus kept the population small. We have no argu¬
ment with this concept, except that the Southern border states were areas
of small farmers and slavery. The difference with the Indians was in the size
and nature of the Indian population.

It is doubtful that Jefferson tried to implement removal as a special bene¬
fit to this section. The nation had not yet reached the point where section¬
alism colored its every act. Surely, the events leading to the War of 1812
clearly set the sections against each other. Yet, it was not until after the War
of 1812-1815 that Jefferson s removal idea became a viable option to the
American people.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 179

Osage Age Groups in 1878

TOTAL IN EACH AGE GROUP

Age

□

►

(1855)

►

□

(1850) 1|

□

(1845)

■

No.

□

Bil

Fig. 25 (continued). Adapted from Burns, The Osage Annuity Rolls of 1878.

Jefferson drafted two constitutional amendments dealing with Indian re¬
moval and possibly the creation of an Indian state. In the first, an east-west
line was to be established on the 32nd parallel. The second draft of an
amendment placed this line at the mouth of the Arkansas River. Only In¬
dians removed from the east and Indians native to the area were to be al¬
lowed to own lands north of these lines. As soon as the Louisiana Territorial
Act passed in 1804, the President was empowered to exercise Indian re¬
moval. At this same time, plans were being made to negotiate a land cession
treaty with the Osages. It was upon their territory that Jefferson hoped to
settle the eastern Indians. Ultimately, these efforts culminated in the Osage
Treaty of 1808.

The War of 1812 and Removal

Before 1812, any attempts to remove Eastern Indians by force would have
been foolhardy. Certainly, the Southeastern nations were too powerful at
this time. Judging by the effects of Tecumseh’s protest, the Northeastern na¬
tions were also too powerful for removal by force. With the presence of the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

180 / Indian State and Removal

Osage Age Groups in 1878

TOTAL IN EACH AGE GROUP

__ 1

♦<

rami

►

♦ ■

►

♦

(1835)

♦ •

►

♦

□

(1 830)

■

No.

ESI

Fig. 25 (continued). Adapted from Burns, The Osage Annuity Rolls of i8y8.

British threat, the American nation could not afford to generate further ani¬
mosities among the Eastern Indians.

Indians of the east had every reason to harbor ill feelings toward the
Americans. The widespread greed of land speculators kept the Indians agi¬
tated. Such activities ignored prior title and other Indian claims to the land.
When they fought to defend their homes and rights, the Indians were placed
in the role of the villain. These problems eventually led to the Treaty of
Greenville in 1795. Such harsh treaty provisions as those found in the Treaty
of Greenville only heightened the ill-feelings of the Northeastern Indians
toward the Americans. These nations were frequently threatened with re¬
moval if they made British alliances. Thus, the idea of voluntary removal
gradually moved to coercive removal.

Certainly, Tecumseh s argument of common ownership of all America
by all Indian groups was never accepted by American law. He argued that
no one Indian or group of Indians had the right to cede lands. Only all
Indians had the right to cede lands; therefore, any treaties lacking assent of
all Indians was invalid.

As the War of 1812 ground its way to an end, peace discussions at Ghent,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 181

Osage Age Groups in 1878

TOTAL IN EACH AGE GROUP

1^333

♦

■

(1825)

♦

►

(1820)

♦

►

(1815)

♦

No.

□

0*3

Hil

Fig. 25 (continued). Adapted from Burns, The Osage Annuity Rolls of 1878.

Belgium, were almost discontinued because of a British Indian proposal.
Under pressure from the Canadians, the British introduced a proposal for an
Indian state to act as a buffer between the United States and Canada. This
proposal was the result of British Indian alliances during the war. They were
determined that Indian interests would not be ignored at the peace confer¬
ence. 11 It is sad that this proposal was rejected because of misunderstanding.
Had the United States agreed to their own terms in the Greenville Treaty,
an Indian nation, sovereign in all respects, would have been created in the
Old Northwest and Canada. Thus, removal to Osage territory would not
have been necessary.

Background on the Removal of the Northeastern Nations

In 1792, the Northeastern nations sent a letter to Zenon Trudeau, who was
the Spanish Lieutenant Governor at St. Louis. 12 Two other earlier Lieutenant
Governors are mentioned in the letter, Francisco Cruzat, who served from
1774 to 1776, and Manuel Perez, who served from 1787 to 1791. The Indi¬
ans were complimentary in their remarks about Cruzat, who encouraged

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

182 / Indian State and Removal

them to move across the Mississippi into Osage territory. Perez is treated
poorly in the letter because of the many Osage attacks on the intruders.
Members of the Loups (Wolf-Pawnee), Miamis, Ottawas, Potawatomis,
Shawnees, and Peorias sent the letter.

The significance of this letter is that it shows the Northeastern nations
had not only become familiar with removal by 1776 but that they had al¬
ready experienced a partial removal by that year. Clearly, the problems of
these early emigrants were mainly from Osage attacks. In the presence of
this evidence, it is probable that some of the reluctance in removal that Jef¬
ferson met with was due to the experiences of these early emigrant nations.
Removal was a new concept to Jefferson and the Americans but not to the
Indians on either side of the Mississippi. The role played by the Osages must
not be overlooked.

It is evident in Spanish letter after Spanish letter that the Osages were a
deterrent to Indian emigration from the east. Caught between the Ameri¬
cans on the east and the Osages on the west, the Northeastern nations had
little choice but to make a stand on their home ground. They knew their
small disorganized war parties had little chance of success in the Osage
homeland. In their own area, each group held the advantage of fighting on
familiar ground.

Indian Wars of the Old Northwest

Large land speculation companies such as the Ohio Company and the
Scioto Company greatly disturbed the Northeastern nations. Movement of
Euro-Americans onto their lands surely put the nations in a bad mood. They
were experienced enough to know that the first trickle of intruders would
soon swell into a torrent.

As a sidelight to the Scioto Company importation of French settlers, we
have some indication that one of these Scioto French married an Osage. 13
The Penn family is a well-known French-Osage family. Apparently, An¬
toine Penn was one of the Scioto settlers, although this may not be entirely
true, because he could have been a French Canadian who acted as guide for
the Scioto French.

Aside from the activities of the land companies, the British were also
active among the Northeastern nations. Although the British had agreed to
abandon the Old Northwest at the end of the Revolution, they still occu¬
pied the region. One must bear in mind that the new United States was
barely surviving in the post-Revolutionary period. Thus, the British did
not abandon the Old Northwest for fear it might fall into French or Spanish
hands. While they desired the fur trade of the area, they also wished to cre-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 183

ate an Indian state as a buffer between themselves and whoever emerged in
possession of the areas to the south.

With this goal in mind, the British attempted to unify the various Indian
nations toward the common goal of an Indian state. However, as the French
and Spanish discovered earlier, unification of the Northeastern people was
impossible. There were too many small groups with goals of their own to
bring unified action of the whole. Yet, for a short time, unification was
achieved. This was enough to generate fear of the Indian south of the Ohio
River.

In order to create disorder that would break up the new-found Indian
unity, a series of raids was initiated in 1788 by the Kentucky settlers. These
raids were the torch that lit the dry fuse of the Indian powder keg. Indian
retaliation was swift and massive. Such hostilities could not be overlooked
by the United States. Thus, a series of devastating Indian Wars was launched
in the Old Northwest.

Between 1790 and 1793, three American generals tried to subdue the
Northeastern Indians. The first of these was Josiah Harmer. Harmer moved
so slowly that the Indians had no difficulty in avoiding him and fell upon
his forces at will. Next to try his hand at Indian warfare was Arthur
St. Clair. The Osages participated in the campaign of 1791, joining with
their Illinois allies to fight the Americans. It was at the defeat of St. Clair
that White Hair I is said to have acquired the White Hair name.

St. Clair had a force of three thousand but only two thousand of his men
were fully effective. On November 3, 1791, his forces were encamped on a
plateau of the Wabash River. Few guards were posted, so all through the
night of November 3 the Indians infiltrated the camp. On the morning of
November 4, they struck the Americans. Six hundred and thirty Americans
were killed and 283 wounded. The defeat was so complete that the survivors
retreated to Fort Jefferson in only twenty-four hours. By comparison, it
took them ten days to make the same distance before the battle.

The effects of this defeat were far-reaching and were reflected in the
Spanish letters. Lieutenant Governor Perez at St. Louis wrote to Governor
Miro at New Orleans on March 31, 1792:

The advantage which the savages obtained in the beginning of last
November against the Americans when the latter were defeated, as I
informed Your Lordship in my official letter No. 204, has caused many
of the tribes to become extremely insolent. This is evident in their
manner of speaking when they present themselves. At the same time
they are secretly encouraged by the English, who support them vig-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

184 / Indian State and Removal

EMIGRANT INDIAN GROUPS OF THE NORTHEAST AND
OLD NORTHWEST AND THEIR RESPECTIVE
POPULATIONS-1829 15

Tuscarora

250

Sac-Fox

6,600

Seneca

2,900

Shawnee

2,000

Onondaga

450

Piankashaw.Wea,

Oneida

1,100

and Peoria

478

Stockbridge

300

Kickapoo

2,200

Brothertown

360

Winnebago

5,800

Cayuga

100

Pottawatomi

6,500

Miami

1,550

Chippewa

15,000

Wyandot

600

Ottawa

4,000

Fig. 26. These Indians were removed to Kansas and then most were removed to Okla¬
homa.

orously, and in the counsels which they give them, as some of the
chiefs have told me, it is clear that they even try to persuade them to
discontinue our friendship. All this is nothing else except the ambition
of the English to obtain the commerce of the Missouri. If the tribes
should succeed in holding an advantage over the Americans again, as
they did before, this district would have no assurance against their
attacks. 14

Indians were not to gain such a victory again until many years later at
the Little Big Horn. General Anthony Wayne was appointed in 1793. Unlike
his two unsuccessful predecessors, Wayne was successful in defeating the
Northeastern Indians at Fallen Timbers. While only about fifty Indians
were killed in the battle, the effect was to break the Indian spirit. It was not
so much the loss of warriors as the absence of British support that disheart¬
ened the Indians.

The Treaty of Fort Greenville in 1795 ended effective Indian Wars in the
Old Northwest. Many individual Indian families migrated to Osage terri¬
tory instead of fighting the Americans. Certainly, the Fort Greenville Treaty
compacted the Northeastern nations into a much smaller area, which made
Indian life there all but intolerable. Now the way was open for settlers to
move into the southern part of the Old Northwest along the Ohio River.
The stage had been set for the ultimate removal of the Northeastern nations.
All that was needed was land to remove them to, and that was provided by
the Louisiana Purchase and the Osage Treaty of 1808 (see Fig. 26).

Again efforts were made to confederate the Northeastern nations but
these efforts were not fruitful. Tecumseh and the Prophet came close to an

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian State and Removal / 185

effective confederation, but they too failed. Some idea of the scope of their
efforts can be gained from their visit to Claremore’s Town. Black Dog and
the other band chiefs were all impressed by Tecumseh and detested the
Prophet. But they refused to join in the confederation. They were well aware
of the loss at Fallen Timbers and the subsequent Fort Greenville Treaty.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Effects of Removal

INDIAN TERRITORY
Creation

Indian Territory came into being because of the removal of the North¬
eastern nations. Missouri and Arkansas were quickly filled with emigrant
Indians. As the population of Euro-Americans increased west of the Missis¬
sippi, pressure was applied to again remove these people from the path of
“Manifest Destiny.” Thus, the Osages were once more compelled to cede
lands to the United States for the benefit of Euro-Americans and emigrant
Indians.

While Osage lands in Missouri and Arkansas, ceded in 1808, were never
organized as Indian Territory, large areas of the cession of 1825 were desig¬
nated as Indian Territory. At one time or another, almost all the lands ceded
by the Osages in 1825 were incorporated under the title of either Indian
Territory or Oklahoma Territory. Originally, almost all of Indian Territory
was in the eastern half of Kansas. That portion north of the Kansas River
was ceded by the Kansas (Kaw) nation. South of the Kansas River, as far
south as the Red River, was ceded by the Osages. The Osages still held a
fifty-mile-wide strip from Missouri to the 100th Meridian in Kansas. A
strip twenty-five miles wide and fifty miles long in the extreme southeast
corner of Kansas was designated as Osage Neutral Lands. All the rest of
their vast domain had been taken by trickery, threats, and force.

We must stress the unique nature of the Osage experience with removal.
Whereas virtually all other Indian nations ceded their lands for the use of
Euro-Americans, most of the Osage domain was dedicated to the use of
other Indians. These lands eventually passed to Euro-Americans from other
Indians rather than the Osages (see Fig. 27, Fig. 28, and Fig. 29).

However, the ultimate title to most lands in Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Effects of Removal / 187

and Oklahoma rests upon the authenticity of the Osage claim and not upon
the claims of secondary Indian claimants or the United States. Disputed
claim to these lands passed through France to Spain and back to France and
then to the United States. All through these transfers of moot claims, only
one people consistently ruled and occupied the area, and these people were
Osages.

Osage Lands

We often read that the Osages were assigned or given a reservation. This
may be partly correct from an Euro-American viewpoint, but “assigned” in
the usual sense normally means an arbitrary designation. In connection
with removal, it indicates removal by arbitrary decision to different lands and
subsequent residence on that land without actual ownership. At no time
could this meaning be applied to the Osages. They always resided on their
own land. The present reservation is owned in fee simple and was never

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 28. This map shows the first owners after the Osages. Not all the Shawnee reservation was in former Osage
territory.

Effects of Removal / 189

assigned or given to the Osages. They selected this part of their old domain
and paid for it with their own money.

Confusion of these terms as applied to the Osages arises because of their
unique position as contributors of land for the use of other Indians. Another
pattern of confusion arises because the Osages purchased their present res¬
ervation. Some writers are so confused that they consider the Osages to be
emigrants to Oklahoma. Apparently, they are unaware that the Osages are
among the few Indian nations native to the state. Since Indian Territory and
removal is so much a part of Osage history, the terms assignment of land and
removal should be clarified.

REMOVAL BY EXCHANGE

Northeastern and Southeastern Nations

Removal was not a great problem for the American government in the
Northeast. Most of the Indian nations there were small and could offer little
effective resistance to removal. Yet, this did not lessen the trauma these na¬
tions experienced from removal. The larger Indian groups to the southeast
presented a more difficult problem for the Americans. By virtue of the size
of the groups and greater ability to confederate, the Southeastern nations
were considered to be a greater threat to the United States.

This difference in possible resistance on the part of the Indians of the
Northeast and those of the Southeast resulted in the Northeastern nations
being the first to experience removal. The first removal by land exchange
was with the Indiana Delawares, October 3, 1818. 1 Next to be removed
were the Kickapoos on July 30, 1819. 2 So, in this way, a pattern of removal
by land exchange was established. In almost all cases, the Indians being re¬
moved expressed fear of the Osages. We do not presume to judge if these
expressions were true fear or fears expressed to avoid removal. In the light
of the Spanish accounts, it would seem to be a little of both. Yet, there
were surprisingly few clashes between the Northeastern emigrants and the
Osages. The same cannot be said for the Southeastern emigrants.

While removal by exchange of lands dates from 1818, removal by in¬
ducement carries earlier dates. Certainly, the Spanish practiced inducement
removal with the eastern Indians. This type of removal between the United
States and the Cherokees dates from 1808. In May of that year, a Chero¬
kee delegation visited Washington. 3 The Cherokees requested that all their
people who wanted to live as hunters be allowed to emigrate west of the
Mississippi.Jefferson promised to make the necessary arrangements. There is
no doubt that this was a part of the reason for the Osage cessions in No¬
vember of 1808.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 29. A small part of the Choctaw-Chickasaw reserve was not in the old Osage domain.

Effects of Removal / 191

Osage-Cherokee Wars
Background

After the Arkansas bands signed the Treaty of 1808 at St. Louis, Jefferson
notified the Cherokees that the way was clear for removal. He specified the
area along the lower White and Arkansas Rivers. 4 Nearly two thousand
Cherokees left Georgia and Tennessee and moved to Arkansas. From this
new base, Cherokee hunters intruded into Osage territory and, thus, a new
series of Osage-Cherokee wars ensued.

While the exchange of land had been discussed with the Cherokee, no
exchange had taken place. In the council of 1809, the Cherokee national
council refused to exchange any land. Hence, the Cherokees in Arkansas
were there as unassigned Indians. Under the Osage understanding of the
Treaty of 1808, these unassigned Cherokees were intruders on Osage hunt¬
ing territory. Therefore, even before the Cherokee crossed the Fire Prairie-
Fort Smith Osage Line to hunt, they were intruders on Osage territory and
as such they were subject to Osage law (see Fig. 30).

Grant Foreman states the following, without acknowledging the above
background: “For many years the powerful Osage were probably more ac¬
tive than any other force in maintaining a state of warfare throughout
Oklahoma and preventing its peaceful occupation by either red or white
men. They challenged practically all tribes of Indians they encountered on
the prairies and east to the Mississippi.” 3

In justice to the Osages, it must be said that they certainly made an epic
effort to protect their homeland. Yet, even today, they are pictured as trouble¬
makers because they defended their land. We do not believe it is bias to point
out that it was their enemies that were reporting the Osages as trouble¬
makers.

Possibly, the United States cast the Osages in the role of villains for
the same reasons the Spanish had. That is, the Osages followed their own
laws and simply did not conform to the plans made by Euro-Americans.
The record clearly shows the Arkansas bands attacking Indians and Euro-
Americans alike for invading their hunting territory. Such defense of their
territory and rights upset the plans of the United States and the other In¬
dian nations. In order to alleviate some of the violence inflicted by the Ar¬
kansas bands and, thus, to proceed with their own plans, Pierre Chouteau
was instructed to influence these bands to reunite with those of the Mis¬
souri. These efforts not only failed, but they also alienated the relationship
between the Claremore bands and Chouteau. Thus, what little influence the
Americans had with the Arkansas Osages was lost. A. P. Chouteau finally
reestablished some of the Chouteau influence in 1817. 6

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

192 / Effects of Removal

Fig. 30. Notice the date of occupation and the date of assignment. Hunting west of
the Osage Line was a major cause of conflict between the Osages and Cherokee.

Osage Raids

An impressive list exists of Osage raids on Euro-Americans. 7 Hunting
camps belonging to John Well were robbed in 1814, 1815, and 1818 by
Osages. Peter and August Friend were deprived of their beaver traps, pow¬
der, and bullet molds in 1818 on the James River. Elijah and Abraham East-
wood were hunting on the Gasconade and were robbed in 1814. William
and James McMurtry were robbed on the Arkansas in 1821. These were all
filed as claims against the Osages. Yet, in all these cases, the people being
robbed were illegal intruders in Osage territory.

The list continues in other localities. In 1815, four white men were killed
on the Arkansas and another was killed on the Red River. Two men were
killed near the mouth of the Canadian in 1816. During the same year a
member of a hunting party was killed on the Kiamichi River. One man

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Effects of Removal / 193

was killed and another wounded near the mouth of the Kiamichi in 1817.
It should be noted that these killings took place west of the Osage Line. East
of the line the parties were robbed but not killed. Perhaps it would be in¬
teresting to compile a list of lives lost in Indian encounters and thus have
some comparison of the various nations. Our purpose here, however, is to
acknowledge the Osage willingness to protect their lands.

On November 17, 1823 a hunting party of twenty Americans and
Frenchmen were attacked by Mad Buffalo of the Claremore bands. Four of
the party were beheaded, the traditional Osage treatment for unauthorized
intruders who kill game. Because of this encounter, steps were taken to
establish Fort Gibson. Nuttall gives us a fair assessment of the Osage situa¬
tion on the Arkansas drainage. He offers a well-considered presentation of
the Euro-American view and then gives this assessment of the Osage view:
“And, on the other hand, we have surely no just reason to expect from the
Indians an unstipulated license to rob their country of that game, which is
necessary to their convenience and subsistence.” 8

Unfortunately for the Osages, not all Americans were as understanding
and forgiving as Nuttall. William Clark had understanding but lacked some
of the forgiving. He confessed to the hope that the Osage-Cherokee war
then in progress (1817) might serve to subdue the Osages. This particular
war came from a Cherokee raid into Osage territory on the Canadian in
the fall of 1816, after the Osages had recovered some stolen horses and killed
a Cherokee in the process.

“Fair-Haired” Cherokees

A large group of Cherokee volunteers had been halted as they crossed the
Mississippi. But Clark was suggesting that maybe it would be beneficial to
allow enough Cherokees to cross from the east so the Claremore bands
could be defeated. 9 It is fortunate that this was not permitted, for despite
their differences, the White Hair and Little Osage bands would hardly stand
aside in such a war. No combination of Cherokees could have defeated a
force of united Osages on their own land in 1817. And defeat of a large
Cherokee force would have wrecked the American removal plans.

Clark, at least, had an understanding of the Osage view, and he was not
entirely unforgiving. He absolutely refused to touch any further Osage land
cession treaties after 1823 and felt a great sorrow for his part in earlier ces¬
sions. President Monroe and Secretary of War Calhoun had neither under¬
standing nor forgiveness for the Osages. All they could see was that the
Osages barred Cherokee access to the great buffalo herds to the west. Since
they wanted to remove the Cherokee west of the Mississippi, they saw the
Osages as a hindrance to their plans. From their viewpoint, the Osages

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

194 / Effects of Removal

should be willing to cede a part of their domain as an outlet for the Chero¬
kee. To facilitate Cherokee removal, the wishes of the Arkansas Cherokees
was to be granted, even if justice to the Osages was sacrificed. 10

The Massacre at Claremore’s Mound

Much has been made of a Cherokee victory over the Osages in what is
sometimes styled the “Battle of Claremore’s Mound.” However, two points
should be noted. First, this was not solely a Cherokee victory. Secondly,
the Osage force consisted of very aged men, women, and young children
amounting to less than a fourth of the number in the attacking force. There
cannot be any doubt that even a “paper tiger” victory over the Osages was
cause for celebration. Certainly, the Cherokee and American officials were
jubilant. Yet, the Cherokee and their allies paid a terrible price for their vic¬
tory during the following twenty years. The Osage thirst for vengeance was
not easily satisfied. While their vengeance upon the Cherokee was complete,
it was also severe on the other nations that participated in this massacre.

This victory over the Osages took place at Claremore’s Village in the
fall of 1817. The attacking force consisted of both eastern and western
Cherokees, Choctaws, Shawnees, Delawares, Caddos, Tonkawas, Comanches,
Coushattas, and a sizable body of white men, 11 altogether the invading army
probably amounted to between six hundred and eight hundred persons.

The invaders knew full well that all able-bodied men, women, and older
children were out on the Plains on the fall hunt. These great “victors” did
not have the courage to face able-bodied Osages. Yet, even knowing they
faced only feeble old Osages, they did not dare to strike without further
treachery.

A runner was sent to the Osage village to tell the Osages that ten or
fifteen Cherokees were waiting to discuss their differences. An old chief
returned with the runner to tell the Cherokees that Claremore was away
and a council could not be held until his return. As a matter of Indian cour¬
tesy and goodwill, the old chief accepted the Cherokee offer of food and
drink. As he sat down, the Cherokees murdered him. We are not acquainted
with Cherokee customs, but among the Plains Indians an offer and accep¬
tance of food and drink was a guarantee of friendship. To violate this pledge
of honor was the vilest act an Indian could commit. To our knowledge, this
is the only example recorded west of the Mississippi of a violation of this
pledge of friendship.

After slaying the old chief, the invaders fell upon the unsuspecting vil¬
lage. Fourteen old Osage men were killed defending the village. Sixty-nine
old women, boys, and children were killed. Slightly more than one hundred
young children were taken captive. 12 All of these Osage captives were taken

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Effects of Removal / 195

to the eastern Cherokee villages. A few were eventually returned to the
Osages, but many lived out their lives as Cherokees.

After killing and mutilating these feeble victims, the allied force looted
and burned the village. They then turned to Black Dogs Village, which was
nearby. However, Black Dog s people had concealed themselves in a cave that
Black Dog had constructed for this purpose. Although the village, like
Claremore s, was burned and looted, the Black Dog people were spared the
fate of Claremore s people. 13 Although Cherokee claims against the Osages
were paid by the Osages, this looting and killing in two Osage villages was
never compensated by the Cherokee or allies involved.

One facet of this attack has never been addressed before. This is the effect
of the attack on the Osages. Among the thirteen war honors held in esteem
by the Osages, none stand higher than successfully defending the village
from the attack of an enemy. This was also one of the most difficult war
honors to attain, since an Osage village was rarely attacked. Only two inci¬
dents have been recorded, the one mentioned here and an earlier attack.
Conversely, to allow one’s village to be looted and its elderly men, women,
and children to be slain or captured was a great dishonor to an Osage war¬
rior. Over the ensuing twenty years, warriors of the Claremore band were
especially diligent in their retaliation.

CONTRAST OF CULTURES

Removal and the Euro-American presence had many detrimental effects on
the Osages and other Indians. Traditionally, any actions taken by the Osage
were initiated only by unanimous consent of the people. Euro-American
contact brought ideas of Western civilization to the Osages. Among these
ideas was the concept of a leader who spoke for his people. This trend can
be seen all through the early records.

By the time the Americans appeared on the Osage scene, the practice of
Osage leaders making the decisions for all the people was well established.
When consent by all was the rule, everyone acted in unison and disputes
were rare. When decisions were made by the leaders alone, disputes often
arose because of differing opinions. The practice of land cessions by Osage
leaders generated great dissension. One must understand that from the for¬
mer Osage view, action by consensus bound all to the course taken. Without
consensus, only those who agreed with the action felt obligated to honor
the course taken. Thus, many Osages did not feel bound by the concessions
made by their leaders. It is this matter that Tecumseh based his speeches
upon when he spoke to other nations. That is, the actions of Indian leaders
held no more force than the power exerted by individual Indians.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

196 / Effects of Removal

Without a practice of universal consent, the only alternative is factional¬
ism or the formation of sects. As Tecumseh so remarkably observed, the ten¬
dency of the Indian groups to factionalize under Euro-American influence
was destructive to Indian unification. This tendency, as we have indicated,
was certainly not limited to the Osages. It is ironic that as Euro-Americans
tried to bring Indians under one universal law and rule, they were simulta¬
neously making this impossible.

No social concept can be transmitted intact from one culture to another.
For perfect transmission of concepts from one culture to another, both cul¬
tures must have shared the same experiences in exactly the same way. Since
different cultures lack shared experiences, a concept of one culture would
be viewed in a different way by another culture. It is this problem that
forms the major difference between the Physical Sciences and the Social
Sciences. In the Physical Sciences, an idea can be reproduced in a laboratory
to test its validity. This is impossible in the Social Sciences because one can¬
not reproduce a culture identical to the original culture. So, a successful
practice in one culture does not necessarily mean the same practice would
be successful in another culture.

Thus, the Western civilization concept of decision by leaders did not
function among Indians as it functioned in Western civilization. Herein lies
a great and important distinction between Western civilization and Ameri¬
can Indian civilization. All through the history of Western civilization,
heavy stress is placed on the leader who fights against the odds of nature
and the men aligned against him. Osage myths place emphasis on people
learning to live with nature and with other people. Their history has no
great heroes, only stories of a heroic people. Rather than men against na¬
ture and other men, Osage literature seeks to place the Osage people in
harmony with nature and with other people. There is no unity behind an
individual—unity is seeking harmony with all.

With these opposing viewpoints, it is interesting to note the effects of the
marriage of the two viewpoints upon the Euro-American community and
the Osage community. As the Osages became more leader-oriented and
Euro-Americans became more people-oriented, each experienced a grow¬
ing disunity. In Western civilization the long history of philosophy related
to man’s relation to the state had always stressed the strong leader. The leader
may have acquired his position by divine right, the force of arms, wealth, or
intrigue. Regardless of how a leader acquired his position he was the ruler.
He made the decisions, or an elite group made the decisions. The people
had very little if any real voice in their government. The introduction of
the Indian-inspired natural rights philosophy was a revolution in Western
thought. So long as the Indian influence existed, so did the dominance of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Effects of Removal / 197

natural rights philosophy. With the decline of Indian influence, Western
civilization again returned to their old themes in philosophy.

The only Western government that approached the old Osage govern¬
ment in its people orientation was that of the Articles of Confederation of
the United States of America. Yet, this government was abandoned in a few
years as being unworkable. One cannot argue that the basic ideas of the
Confederation were unworkable, because those ideas had been function¬
ing for centuries in Indian cultures. One can argue that the ideas of the
Confederation were unworkable in a government of Western civilization
because the people of that culture did not have the background to make
it work.

We cannot determine where the Indian idea of people-government will
go in Western civilization. Hopefully, it will be a benefit to all people. We
can determine that Western ideas of the strong leader have disunited the
Osage people and Indians in general. Furthermore, this disunity is likely
to continue for many generations. For the Osages, exposure to this idea
was very harmful. Our fervent hope is that Osage concepts of people-
orientation will not be as harmful to Western civilization.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

UNITED STATES INDIAN POLICY
Introduction

In August of 1789 the new government of the United States created a war
department. Among the duties assigned to this department were those
“relative to Indian affairs.” By an Act of Congress, July 9, 1832, the office
of Commissioner of Indian Affairs was created. In June of 1834, an Act
of Congress created the Department of Indian Affairs within the War De¬
partment.

With the creation of the Department of the Interior in 1849, the Depart¬
ment of Indian Affairs was attached to the new department as the Bureau
of Indian Affairs. This new organization was comprehensive in Indian af¬
fairs, since it included everything connected with Indians. 1

The date of 1849 is significant in Osage history because it brought a
softer approach toward the Osages. While the effects of this change did not
become evident until twenty years later, nevertheless, a change occurred.
Possibly the change of view toward the Osages was as much the result of
the War in Kansas and the Civil War as it was due to the change from the
War Department to the Interior Department. Yet, even before the War in
Kansas in the 1850s a softer attitude toward the Osages was noticeable. So,
it seems safe to say that the change in organization brought a change in
attitude toward the Osages.

Not only does 1849 mark the beginning of a softer approach to the
Osages, but it also marks the high-water mark of the traditional Osage life.
From this time onward, the Osages moved rapidly from their traditional life.
The Osages were fortunate in having a rare agent at the Neosho Agency for
part of these transitional years. We do not believe A. J. Dorn was a saint, but
he surely was an improvement over his predecessors. At the least, his actions

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 199

show he tried to protect the Osages, and, most unusual, he was the first
Osage Agent who spoke in their defense.

Despite its faults, and there are many, the Bureau of Indian Affairs ap¬
peared on the scene in time to prevent the total extinction of the Osage
people. The War Department had already set the stage for their destruction.
Previous measures by the War Department had all but destroyed the Osage
people. Three outstanding Bureau of Indian Affairs Agents were at least
partly responsible for saving the Osage people. These were A. J. Dorn, Isaac
Gibson, and Major Laban J. Miles. Their job was never easy, and they made
mistakes, but they should be remembered by the Osage people.

Unfortunately, many practices established under the War Department
were carried over into the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Many problems existed
within the Indian Department apart from graft and corruption. An enlight¬
ened policy was beyond hope in an era marked by paternalistic greed for
everything owned by the Indians. It would be difficult to assess which
harmed Indians the most, paternalistic well-wishers or outright greed of
corporate and settler interests. Some type of policy had to evolve in the
midst of conflicting interests.

Elements of Indian Policy

There were three basic elements to Indian policy. Land is the first of these
elements. The body of Indian land law is staggering in its complexities. 2
Most of the early relationships between the two cultures were commercial,
but land soon replaced trade as the leading economic factor. The next ele¬
ment was cultural. Since Indians could not be allowed to occupy such vast
tracts of land they must become Westernized, or as it was commonly ex¬
pressed, “civilized.” Finally, population and variety among Indians had to be
dealt with in any policy for dealing with the Indian. Sadly, this latter ele¬
ment was too often overlooked in the opinions of reformers and in the
greed for Indian land.

Each of these elements will be dealt with under their respective headings
in this chapter. At the outset, it must be said that these three elements are
interrelated and overlap in many respects. However, of the three elements,
land is the most persistent thread running through the fabric of Indian
Policy. This does not necessarily lessen the importance of the others at vari¬
ous times.

Indian Land Policies: The Basic Concepts

There were three basic concepts involved in Indian land policies. First, it was
agreed among the European powers that only the discoverer of the area had

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

200 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

the sole right to acquire Indian land title. Secondly, at no time was the right
of occupancy by Indians ever denied. That is, the Indians’ right to the lands
they occupied was not denied. Lastly, in American policy, only the national
government had the right to acquire Indian lands. The Indians could neither
alienate nor transfer their title to any other entity.

There is little need to touch upon the ethics of the agreement by the
European powers to recognize the discovering nation as sovereign over the
area. The fact that Indians did not concede this right until Euro-Americans
were capable of enforcing their claims serves a single purpose. It clearly
shows that Indian lands were taken by force instead of by purchase. The
situation is much like the school yard bully who offers a smaller child five
cents for a ten dollar agate marble. If the smaller child refuses to sell his
agate for a nickel, he gets thrashed by the bully and the bully takes the
marble anyway.

It would be a mistake to assume that recognition of the right of occu¬
pancy was a clear concept. Occupancy is subject to a multitude of interpre¬
tations, and the use of the term right is more often used in a loose instead of
restricted sense. What constitutes occupancy depends upon a variety of cul¬
tural factors. Occupancy in an agrarian culture would likely imply cultiva¬
tion of the land. In an industrial culture, it would suggest utilization of the
land to produce resources for industry. However, use as a vehicle to define
occupation is only one facet of the definition. Certainly, occupation means
a physical residence upon the land. Yet, here we encounter the problem of
determining the limits of residence.

When one resides on, say, a one-fourth acre, does the person reside on the
entire parcel or only a portion of the parcel? It is easy to see that when one
starts examining occupancy a variety of problems arise. We will not go
through the same process with the term right, but it is even more open to
abuse in usage. The point to be made is that right of occupancy can be
defined in almost any way our desires dictate. This is exactly what happened
to Indian lands. That is, Euro-Americans wanted the Indian lands without
the stigma of being labeled thieves. Thus, the convenient fiction of right of
occupancy was created.

It would be pure speculation to try to determine how Indians would
have fared under state and local governments or private control. Indian af¬
fairs would have been even more chaotic than they were under federal con¬
trol, because the sheer numbers of state and local governmental units would
have insured chaos. However, speculation is needless. The whole matter was
fated to come under control of the central government because the Indians
were sovereign nations. Since this involved external sovereignty, the central
government was the only one who could deal with Indians.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 201

In the beginning of the relationship between the two cultures, there was
no question of whether Indian nations were sovereign or not. They pos¬
sessed full sovereignty. Yet, while the fiction of control was lodged in the
central government, actual contacts and agreements with Indians were made
at the local or individual level. This did not change materially until the Ar¬
ticles of Confederation clearly placed Indian affairs in the hands of the cen¬
tral government. As the power to enforce the Euro-American will over In¬
dians grew, the sovereignty of Indian nations was eroded. Finally, the point
was reached where Indian sovereignty became more fiction than fact.

The continuation of the fiction of sovereignty made dealing with Indi¬
ans a matter of dealing with a quasi-foreign power. Thus, treaties were nec¬
essary to legalize Indian policies. Following the Civil War, large corporate
entities largely ran the United States by influencing the selection of Sena¬
tors in Congress. Thus, the Indian treaties were heavily slanted to corporate
interests. Eventually, the Populist Revolt changed the method of selecting
Senators to a popular vote and, thus, diluted the corporate influence in
American government and Indian affairs. We will come back to this matter
in more detail later.

While corporate interests have always influenced Indian relationships,
they did not dominate the formation of Indian policy until after 1850. Thus,
the settlers, intruders, and reformers had the greatest influence in making
Indian policy until 1850, at least insofar as the Osages are concerned. We
must also be aware that a considerable amount of Indian policy was and still
is made by government employees who administer Indian affairs. Thus, we
find that Indian policy was primarily made by corporate interests, settlers,
intruders, reformers, and government personnel.

Cultural Policy: Cultural Contrasts

In August of 1806, Jacob Bright made a trading expedition to the Arkansas
bands and recorded a speech by Town Maker (Claremore II). 3

What is bad now, Nothing is bad, the water is good and the Road is
good. . . . The Land is good and the Game is Plenty—you shall go back
with a glad Heart—the Road is Wide for all the White People. . . . we
find that you don't want to sell your goods too high you part with
them with a good Heart. ... I should be glad to go and see our Ameri¬
can Father—You American Chiefs have more than one Soldier—they
have plenty of them you see the Chiefs and soldiers here, they are
sitting Round you. . . . When you come again we wish you to have
Coats made of blue and red facings—we have thirty seven soldiers and
five Chiefs—Your talks are very good, we and the white hairs are not

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

202 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

very good friends—him and his People are Americans, and some of
them have been to see their great Father and received his good talks
but I believe they have lost most all his words on their way home, we
wish to be Americans too—

This speech reveals bits and pieces of Osage culture. It also shows some
of the manipulation taking place between the Claremore bands and the
White Hair bands.

For those who are not familiar with Osage ways, references to good
water and a good road may not be clear in meaning. Good water had a
special significance to all the Dhegiha peoples. It was symbolic of blood and
kinship among persons. Thus, to be offered a drink of good water was to
be treated as a blood relative. In the sense it is used here, the relationship
with the animals has been good, and they have many furs to trade.

The Road, mentioned twice, is not a reference to a physical thoroughfare
but the road of life. If the road of life is narrow, it is beset with a multitude
of misfortunes. If the road is wide, one is at liberty to pick the easiest pas¬
sage. A good road offers a person a good life and the achievement of old
age. Other expressions seem clear as they stand.

We started this topic with Claremore IPs speech in order to stress the
existence of cultural differences. All humans tend to view the world around
them from their own backgrounds. While all humans share much in com¬
mon, enough differences exist between cultures to cause misunderstand¬
ings. If we assume that the majority of the Euro-American culture had
some good intentions toward the Indians, we should expect these to appear
in the Indian policies. Likewise, if these intentions do appear in the policies,
they would fail to consider the Indian culture as a factor. That is, even well-
meaning policies were often destructive to the Indian because the Indian
culture was not considered in making the policy.

Cultural Policy: Misconceptions

“In the early years of the sixteenth century, educated whites, steeped in the
theological teachings of Europe, argued learnedly about whether or not In¬
dians were humans with souls, whether they, too, derived from Adam and
Eve (and were therefore sinful like the rest of mankind) or whether they
were a previously unknown subhuman species.” 4 While this may seem in¬
sane to us today, we must realize that five hundred years from now, some of
our cherished ideas may seem to verge on insanity. We must be aware of not
only cultural smugness but also of a smugness bred of our own times.

Another source of misconceptions arose from the fact that North Ameri¬
can Indians had no written language. Thus, all the early accounts about In-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 203

dians were filtered through the backgrounds of Western civilization. The
initial biases of the early writers still have a bad influence on what is writ¬
ten about Indians. When native writers write of their people, the most
difficult task is to determine what is Indian and what is Western. Surely,
Indian policy based on what had been written about Indians prior to 1880
was certain to border on fantasy. A purely Osage history with no Western
influence would be incomprehensible to a modern Osage. By the same to¬
ken, Western history without reference to Indians is incoherent.

For the historian of Indian life, the task becomes complicated. So far as
we know, no Indian history has ever been written solely within the river
of Indian civilization. Arnold Toynbee states this problem as “the miscon¬
ception of the unity of history—involving the assumption that there is only
one river of civilization, our own, and that all others are either tributary to
it or else lost in the desert sands.’’’’ Thus, Indian histories we have read all
hang on the course of Western civilization and are not independent in and
of themselves—including this effort. Naturally, this same factor greatly af¬
fected the formation of Indian policy.

Your new-caught, sullen peoples

Half devil and half child.

Take up the White Man’s burden

And reap his old reward:

The blame of those ye better,

The hate of those ye guard. 6

Thus, Kipling expressed a not uncommon feeling in Western civilization.
Although he was writing about the British Empire, his thoughts were com¬
mon among Euro-Americans with respect to the American Indian. With
very little reservation one can say that “the white man’s burden” attitude
was influential in shaping American Indian policy.

Closely related to Kipling’s view is the feeling that Indians were an im¬
pediment to the development of the United States. 7 There was a widespread
belief that Indians did not utilize the land as well as Americans did. Thus,
the thinking was that the inferior use of the land deprived America of a
higher use. No fair-minded economist could argue that the subsistence ag¬
riculture of the American frontier was a higher use of the land than the uses
applied by Indians. Certainly, the agrarian revolution following the Civil
War brought a higher use, at least in the sense of an immediate increase of
production. Yet it also reduced the number of people who labored on the
land to produce food. We must note that while the immediate farm toil

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

204 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

necessary to feed the peoples of the United States has been reduced, the
total hours of labor involved has been increased. This is counting factory
workers, extractive industries, transportation, and on and on into the various
labors needed to make farm machinery and to transport, process, and market
the foodstuffs. Arguments notwithstanding, seeing Indians as an impedi¬
ment was a major force in shaping Indian policy.

For some reason, the Indian population supported by a given area and,
indeed, the total Indian population for the lower forty-eight states have
been consistently understated. The usual total for mainland United States is
placed at between 500,000 and 1,100,000. This is an unreasonable estimate,
if one looks at the archaeological evidences and manipulated information. A
more realistic estimate would have been between 7,000,000 and 8,000,000
in 1500. We have earlier noted the Spanish underestimation of the Osages
at 1,200 warriors. Major George Sibleys estimate is only slightly larger. The
Osages themselves estimated their population at 14,000 as late as 1850. This
would indicate a warrior strength of 2,200-2,500 men at least. Excavated
Osage village sites tend to support the Osage estimate of their own popu¬
lation.

An excellent discussion of this problem can be found in The Invasion of
America. As the discussion in Francis Jennings s book concludes, Europeans
did not find a wilderness here in North America: “With all their resources,
and including both migration and natural increase, the English apparently
required the full century [the seventeenth century] to duplicate the popu¬
lations that Indians alone had maintained in New England prior to inva¬
sion.” 8

The matters of population, use of land, and stage of civilization are all
interrelated. People assuming that the American Indian was at the so-called
savagery stage of civilization cannot accept the truth of actual Indian popu¬
lations. In spite of archaeological proofs of dense Indian populations dis¬
covered in the 1990s and early-zooos, the traditional Indian population
estimates are still used. A savage culture could not support large Indian
populations. It is probable that the population of Indians north of Mexico
totaled somewhere around 10,000,000 in 1500. Therefore, the Indian popu¬
lation had attained a high order of civilization with the ability to support
populations exceeding those of medieval Europe. Their use of the land was,
in some respects, more advanced than that of sixteenth-century Europe. In
some respects this is still true today, especially in terms of conservation and
maintenance of an ecological balance.

By far, the most erroneous assumption about American Indians was that
they must be assimilated into the majority or perish. 9 The Osages still cling
to many of their customs. Although these have been somewhat altered, their

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 205

culture still exists outside of the majority culture. Considering the fact of
over three hundred years of contact and at least one hundred years of all-out
effort to destroy Osage culture, it is remarkable that any shreds of the cul¬
ture remain. While most Osages have accommodated themselves to the ma¬
jority culture, they still retain a separate culture of their own. This would
be an indication that despite all efforts to destroy the culture to achieve
assimilation, assimilation is not necessarily inevitable. Other Indians also
show this cultural persistence, which strongly suggests an error among those
who thought Indians must assimilate or perish.

OSAGE CULTURE
Descriptions

“Powerful and well-organized, the Osages were respected by whites and
Indian tribes alike as formidable foes.” 1 " Thus, the Bureau of Indian Affairs
describes the Osages as fighters. However, Swanton gives a further comment
on the Osages, as fighters noted for their social organization.

During the eighteenth century and the first part of the nineteenth,
the Osage were at war with practically all the other Indians of the
Plains and a large number of the woodlands, to many of which their
name was a synonym for enemy.

As above stated, the Osage attained a high reputation as fighters
among all the tribes of the southern Plains and many of those of the
Gulf region. They are also remarkable for their social organization. 11

While most writers stress the fame of the Osages as fighters, those who
knew them best stress other traits. Among those who knew the Osages by
living with them was Fr. J. J. Bax, S. J.: “According to my experience, there
are few nations in this region as affable and as affectionate as the Osages.
Indeed, it may be said that it is natural to them to wish to live in perfect
friendship with all whom they know. Peace and harmony reign among
them; no harsh words ever escape their tongues, unless when they are drunk
to excess.” 12

Although Fr. Bax was obviously partial to the Osages, others, such as
Dr. Francis La Flesche of the Smithsonian, also reflect this view of the
Osage character. Perhaps the most detailed physical description of the Osages
is given by George Catlin. Catlin spent some time at Fort Gibson. Dur¬
ing his stay he sketched and painted several Osages. It is doubtful that Cat¬
lin visited the Osage village north of Fort Gibson, but probably met and
sketched his Osage subjects at the Fort. Catlin never visited or sketched any

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

206 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

of the White Hair or Little Osage people. 13 Catlin would have agreed with
Washington Irvings physical description of the Osages:

Near by these was a group of Osages: stately fellows; stern and
simple in garb and aspect. They wore no ornaments; their dress con¬
sisted mainly of blankets, leggins, and moccosons. Their heads were
bare; their hair was cropped close, excepting a bristling ridge on the
top, like the crest of a helmet, with a long scalp lock hanging behind.
They had fine Roman countenances, and broad deep chests; and, as
they generally wore their blankets wrapped round their loins, so as to
leave the bust and arms bare, they looked like so many noble bronze
figures. The Osages are the finest looking Indians I have seen in the
West. They have not yielded sufficiently, as yet, to the influence of
civilization to lay by their simple Indian garb, or to lose the habits of
the hunter and the warrior; and their poverty prevents their indulging
in much luxury of apparel. 14

A more modern view is stated by Bill Burchardt: “Father Marquette,
Washington Irving, the French Trader Chouteau, were much impressed
with the Osages. They were not wrong. If the Osages have a tribal charac¬
teristic, it is that they are philosophical, perhaps even mystical, an admirable
people who underwent a fantastic ordeal on Americas final frontier.” 15

We will touch upon the ordeal that is mentioned above in the next pe¬
riod, 1850-1865. Our purpose here is to show the Osages as they were in
the first half of the nineteenth century.

Physical Feats

The Osages were remarkable walkers. Although there are many accounts of
this fact, the following quote is possibly the best account:

The pedestrian powers of these indians [Osages] is almost in¬
credible. ... To give you some idea of their speed in traveling—a
young warrior was dispatched on foot, from Col. Chouteau’s with an
express to the Creek Agency, a distance of about forty miles; he started
at 12 o’clock noon and returned with an answer, between 9 and
10 o’clock on the same evening; performing a walk of nearly eighty
miles in less than ten hours. ... it is indeed, very common for the men
and women to proceed with their skins from Clairmont’s village to
Col. Chouteau’s do their trading and return home, on the same day;
the distance, going and coming, being not less, certainly, than seventy
miles. 16

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 207

Some accounts stress the fact that the Osages made better time afoot than
they did on horseback. Yet, one must not be misled into thinking that the
Osages were not excellent horsemen. “The Osages learn to ride from earli¬
est infancy: they become surprisingly expert. ... at war, they escape the ar¬
rows of their enemies by concealing themselves so adroitly behind the
flanks of their beasts that they show only one foot. At play they gallop bare-
back with bridles hanging loose, and lean so far over that one would think
they were going to lose their balance. They shoot their arrows with surpris¬
ing accuracy from this awkward position.” 17

Victor Tixier went on a buffalo hunt with the Osages and had ample
opportunity to observe Osage horsemanship. He also gives the best-known
description of Osage riding equipment. While cooking is not usually con¬
sidered to be a physical feat, anyone who has cooked over an open fire would
dispute this common misconception. “Nearly every tribe on the Missouri
had some interesting skill that set them off from other Indians. . . . The
Osages had a class of men who served as chefs or cooks, devoting them¬
selves to the culinary art, to preparing and presiding over formal feasts, and
also acting as town criers.” 18

These unusual men were called marmitons by the French. In most in¬
stances, they were old warriors who had no other way of making a living.
Undoubtedly, the Marmaton River in the old Osage country of Vernon
County, Missouri, takes its name from these cooksheralds, although the
spelling is slightly different.

In another place, Tixier describes a variant of the Osage ceremony of
“Striking the Earth”: “I returned to the camp; I could hear angry words in
the distance; I was told that the warriors were striking the post. I came near
and saw that a red post had been set in the ground. The braves came forward
one after the other [and] struck it with their tomahawks; then, extending
their hands toward it, they listed their acts of courage and the reasons for
their hatred of the Pawnee.” 19

The Osage ceremony of Striking the Earth was very much like Tixier’s
description. An ancient war club was used instead of a tomahawk. First, a
dent was struck into the ground, then a straight east-west line was drawn
on each side of the dent. Wavy lines were drawn north and south of the
dent. The dent represented the sun and the straight lines its path. Benefits of
the sun’s rays were represented by the wavy lines. As part of the ceremony,
a respected warrior was asked to recite his war honors.

The purpose of this ceremony was to thank the Great Creator for bring¬
ing sky and earth together, and thus creating the unity of sky and earth so
that life on earth was possible. In a broader sense, this ceremony expressed
the unity of the Osage people and their promise to the Great Creator to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

208 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

protect the lands he had given them from transgressions of intruders. Strik¬
ing the Post was a variation of the main ceremony. Here, the red post rep¬
resented the lifeblood of the enemy who had intruded onto Osage lands.
Each tomahawk stroke was a promise to strike the enemy. Recitation of war
honors were humble pleas to the Great Creator to help them protect the
“center of the earth,” as they called the Osage territory. Like Striking the
Earth, this also was a rite of unity, but it expressed their unity in striking
the Pawnee.

Religion

If the Osages were not the most religious of all the Indian people, they were
close to it. All who came into contact with them noted this facet of the
Osage character. Perhaps the best statement about the Osages and religion
was given in Beacon on the Plain. Speaking of the Osages, Isaac McCoy says:
“No tribe with which I have come into contact has given more unequivo¬
cal evidence of their belief in God, his superintending providence, and the
immortality of the soul.” 2 "

One often reads of the “mourning” at sunrise. The Osages had three
prayer eagles. These were the Red Eagle, White Eagle, and Dark or Black
Eagle. Each of these eagles symbolized a time of prayer. The red of sunrise
made the eagle’s wings seem to be red. At noon, an eagle’s wings shimmered
in the rays of the sun’s zenith and seemed to be white. At sunset, the long
shadows made the eagle’s wings dark with the promise of night. Thus, the
Osages were reminded to pray at sunrise, noon, and sunset.

No time of the day was more sacred than sunrise. The coming of the sun
symbolized the beginning of life. This in turn reminded everyone of those
who had departed from life, since the beginning and ending of life were
associated with each other in Osage minds. Thus, mourning at sunrise,
which was a happy occasion, also brought a sadness. Old Osages often said,
“they walked the spirit path even as they lived.” We have ample evidence
of this sadness at sunrise and mourning on other occasions: “John Bradbury,
in 1811, attributed this phenomenon of crying to sorrow for their dead, but
he also recounts the Osage mourning for those they were about to rob.
Twenty-five years later Josiah Gregg also noted this characteristic. He stated
that the Osages were the most accomplished mourners of all the savages and
could be prevailed upon to cry for the troubles of a total stranger.” 21

Bradbury was correct when he noted the Osages mourning for those
they were about to rob. This was done before and after the fact. Robbing a
fellow human was an act of disharmony. When the harmony of the world
is disturbed, one must express sadness and regret for the act that upset the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 209

unity of nature. More difficult for an Osage warrior was to mourn the
death of an enemy he had slain. To destroy a life is a serious unharmonious
act. While this applied to all life, both animate and inanimate, 22 it was es¬
pecially true of human life.

Osage Dress

Before trade goods became common among the Osages, the men wore
breech clouts secured by a sash of fmger-woven buffalo hair. In colder
weather, hip-length buckskin leggins were worn as an addition to the
breech clout. Moccasins were made from skins of deer, elk, or buffalo. On
some days, a robe was worn. This might have been made of skins from buf¬
falo, panther (puma), bear, or any number of smaller animals. Women wore
deerskin wraparound skirts fastened on the right side. Another deerskin was
fastened over one shoulder and fell below the opposite arm. The ladies also
wore high-top moccasins and leggins.

Men wore their hair in a roach on top, and a long “tail” of hair grew on
the back side of the roach. Women wore their hair shoulder length or longer.
A part down the middle was dyed red to represent the sun’s path. Normally,
married women or ladies not interested in marriage wore their hair behind
their ears and shoulders. When a lady wore her hair in front of her shoulders,
it indicated she was interested in marriage.

Both men and women wore adornments—earrings, bracelets, pendants,
and necklaces. These were made from a variety of materials such as seeds,
copper, stone, bone, wood, and fossils. Painting the body was another form
of adornment. Clay deposits of iron oxides (red), aluminum oxides (yellow),
and copper oxides (blue and green), including vegetable dyes, were used.
The four sacred colors were red, yellow, blue, and dark (usually black or
navy). Besides the paint, wealthier Osages were often tattooed. The men
were tattooed on the chest and over the shoulder with representations of the
sacred red-handled knife and their war honors. The ladies were tattooed on
the chest, backs, and arms. These were all symbols of peace and life, since
adornment for women forbad symbols of taking life.

With the coming of trade goods, both clothing and adornment changed.
Yet, it must be said that even today the Osages dress more somberly than
other Indians. This is not to say bright colors are not used, but flashiness is
tempered by more sedate colors and designs. Typically reds and yellows are
toned down with blacks, blues, and greens. Designs tend to stand out on
stark backgrounds instead of a massive splash of colorful designs.

Around 1812, a noticeable change took place in the styles of the ladies of
the Claremore bands. 22 The skirts were shorter than those of the upper Neo-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

210 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

sho bands. Bare midriffs became common among the women of the lower
Neosho or Grand River. Hairstyles were also shortened for a time, but the
White Hair band women wore their hair long. Little differences existed in
the styles of the men. Men still wore hip-length leggins, moccasins with
deer skin uppers and buffalo hide soles, and the usual breech clout. The leg-
gins tended to be made of broadcloth, which was sometimes called stroud-
ing, and the breechcloth was made of the same material. In colder weather,
the traditional robes of skins were giving way to striped woolen blankets.
However, the Osage word for robe, me, was used to describe these trade
blankets.

Marriage and Divorce

By 1850, a new version of the marriage ceremony began to appear. Since it
has many aspects in common with the French celebration following mar¬
riage, we assume it came from the Osage-French mixed-bloods. The young
ladies who were friends of the bride would run a footrace from the grooms
lodge to a tree and back. The winner got extra gifts while the others took
all of the bride’s clothing except her very poorest.

Dressed in these poor garments she would be escorted to the home of the
groom. Customarily, if they liked each other, the bride and groom would
eat together and show that they enjoyed each other’s company. However, if
they were not pleased by the arrangement, they would sit for hours in a
sullen pout. 24

If a man wished to divorce a woman, he took his hunting gear along
with his clothing and moved out of the lodge. However, if a woman wished
to divorce a man, she threw his clothing and hunting gear out of the lodge.
The lodge and all in it, except the husband’s clothing and hunting gear, be¬
longed to the wife. The children remained with the mother, and her oldest
brother continued as their mentor. If the mother remarried, the new hus¬
band was called In ta cite (father) by the children and stepsons were called
We she ka (my son) while stepdaughters were called We slum ka (my daugh¬
ter) by the stepfather.

The Osage Calendar

A year in the majority culture is equal to two Osage years. One Osage year
was the Autumn or Winter Year which started in September/October and
ended in February/March. The Osage Summer or Spring Year started in
March/April and ended in August/September. Each year is composed of
six moons. Osages did not count by days; they counted by nights. 25 For ex¬
ample, if they were away for a time, they would say three nights (three
sleeps) instead of three days.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 211

We will start with the Summer Year, which had six moons. March was
usually called the Idle Days Moon, but some called it Just Doing That Moon.
April was called the Planting Moon by most of the Old Osages, but a few
called it the Prepare Ground for Planting Moon. May also had two names.
It was mainly called the Flower Killer Moon, but it was also called When
the Roses Bloom Moon. The roses were the wild rose of the prairies. June
was called the Buffalo Bull Fattening Moon, but it was also known as the
Earth Pawing Moon. July was the Buffalo Breeding Moon. The Yellow
Flower Moon of August finished the Summer Year.

Autumn Years started in September with the Deer Hiding Moon. Deer
Breeding Moon coincided with October in the Western calendar. J. Joseph
Mathews reports that November was called the Coon Breeding Moon, 26
but the name When the Deer Break (shed) Their Horns (antlers) Moon was
more widely used for November. Black Bears Give Birth was the name for
December. A difference of opinion exists over the names for January and
February. Many believe that January was the Solitary Moon month and that
it was followed by the Long Days Moon of February, but some say these are
reversed.

The idea of weeks was probably not known before the advent of the
white man. Surely, the days of the week that have come down to us from
the Osages show the hand of Western civilization. Sunday was called the
Great Mystery Day or God’s Day. Monday was called the First Day; Tuesday,
the Second Day; Wednesday, the Third Day; and Thursday, the Fourth Day.
Friday shows the Catholic influence since it was called Not Eat Meat Day.
Saturday, being the Sabbath, was called Nothing is Done Day.

Food

The Osages did not have milk or butter; however, bone marrow and buffalo
fat were good substitutes for butter. Fry bread was cooked in boiling fat
from the buffalo or bear. Marrow and fat was kept in doeskin sacks. Buffalo
short ribs were flattened and sewn together with bark thread so as to make
a large sheet, which was thrown over a rack to dry. Long strips of muscle
were dried and sometimes braided together before the final drying over
fires. Once dried, meat was saturated in fat then stored in parflesches. 27 With
proper care, the meat preserved in this way would keep for two or three
years. 28

Two types of sausages were made by the Osages. The small intestine of
the buffalo was washed and turned inside out. This placed the fat to the
inside. Meat cut in thin strips was then enclosed in the intestine with water
added. This sausage was then broiled on glowing charcoal embers. 29

Another type of sausage is commonly called pemmican. A deer skin bag

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

212 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

would be filled with a mixture of pulverized dried buffalo meat, berries,
nuts, marrow, and suet. This mixture would be tamped tightly into the bag
so as to leave no air spaces. Stored in this way, the mixture would keep for
several years. It could be eaten as either an uncooked or cooked meal.

Stanica, made of wild persimmons, was another food that would keep for
some time. Since this wild fruit tends to be attached to large seeds, the
Osages developed a means to separate the fruit from the seeds. Finger-sized
switches were placed side by side with some slight space between them. By
pressing the persimmons back and forth over this frame, the soft fruit would
pass between the switches into a container below. The seeds would remain
on the top of the frame.

Once about a quart of fruit was accumulated, the pulp was spread thinly
on a wooden paddle. By holding the paddle above a fire, the pulp was dried
into a fruit “leather.” For storage, stanica strips were braided and placed in
parflesches.

Topeka means the same in Osage as it does in Kaw. That is, it means
“place where we dug potatoes.” The Kaw and Osage potatoes were not the
same as the Irish potato. These were legumes that grew wild along streams.
Pomme de Terre is French for ground apple or potato, which was abundant
on a river by that name in Missouri. There is a large and varied collection
of Osage foods, but these examples are enough to indicate they were a well-
nourished people.

Some Osage Views

Ah ke tah Tun ka (Big Soldier) made a statement early in the 1800 s. He was
commenting on why he did not adopt the white man’s ways.

I see, and admire your way of living, your good warm houses, your
extensive cornfields, your gardens, your cows, oxen, work horses, wag¬
ons and a thousand machines that you know the use of; I see that you
are able to clothe yourself, even from weeds and grass. In short, you
can do almost what you choose. You whites possess the power of al¬
most every animal you use. You are surrounded by slaves. Everything
about you is in chains, and you are slaves yourselves. I fear if I should
change my pursuit for yours, I, too, should become a slave. Talk to my
sons; perhaps they may be persuaded to adopt your fashions, or at least
recommend them to their sons; but for myself, I was born free, was
raised free, and wish to die free. ... I am perfectly contented with my
condition. 3 "

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 213

Two points stand out in Big Soldiers’ statement. First, he praises the ma¬
terial culture of the white man and then he deplores the spiritual culture.
He seems to be saying, “You have traded your freedom for material posses¬
sions. My freedom is dearer to me than material possessions.” Maybe Henry
David Thoreau at Walden Pond and Big Soldier on the Osage Prairies had a
message that modern Americans should take to heart.

If Euro-Americans got mixed signals from the Osages, the same may
be said in reverse. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the matter of
drinking. In a letter from Fr. John J. Bax to Fr. Peter J. De Smet dated June
i, 1850, Fr. Bax relates that he had lectured Little Beaver’s band about the
evils of drink. Beaver’s response is worth noting: “Father, what thou sayest
is true. We believe thy words. We have seen men buried because they loved
and drank fire water. One thing astonishes us. We are ignorant; we are not
acquainted with books; we never heard the words of the Great Spirit; but
the whites who know books, who have understanding, and who have heard
the commandments of the Great Spirit,—why do they drink this fire¬
water? Why do they bring it to us, when they know God sees them?” 31

Beaver was probably sincere in asking these questions. However, it would
fit the Osage sense of humor to pose such questions. Two other observers
had occasion to note the Osage humor in serious matters.

Henry Leavitt Ellsworth had been appointed Commissioner in order to
bring about a peace between the Osage and Pawnee. Washington Irving’s
party had fallen in with the Ellsworth party and so Irving was present at
Ellsworth’s speeches. In one speech, Ellsworth addressed a group of aged
Osage men and women. During a long oration about the blessings of peace
and admonishments to keep the peace, the old Osages listened attentively.
They then assured Ellsworth, to his great satisfaction, that they would keep
the peace. Of course, they were well aware that because of their age they
had no choice except to keep the peace. 32

Count Portales gives us another account of Osage humor. Again, this was
generated by Ellsworth on the same mission of peace on the Plains. Osages
find pompous characters like Ellsworth a good target for their humor. Such
characters never grasp the fact that they are the butt of the joke and this
pleases the Osage funny bone. It is like counting coup without the prey
being aware that he had been touched by the coup stick. In this incident,
Ellsworth again made an oration on the evils of warfare and the blessings
of peace. He struck a pose and emphatically stated that the Great White
Father was going to put an end to the war between the Osage and Pawnee.
After a few remarks, the Osages left. The interpreter, Pierre Beyette, in¬
formed Portales that the Osages had said, “If the Great White Father was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

214 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

going to end the Osage war against the Pawnee they had better make the
most of the time left and kill as many Pawnee as they could.” 33

Captives

Most captives taken by the Osages were either traded as slaves or adopted
into an Osage family. Many captives who had been adopted held the hon¬
ored office of Sho ka (messenger). Observers usually called these adopted
messengers slaves because they ran errands for the Osages. This was clearly
either a misunderstanding or an intentional misstatement. Adopted persons
were preferred as Sho ka because it was thought they would be more impar¬
tial in disputes and arrangements than a blood Osage. Sho kas not only ran
errands and carried messages, but they also arranged marriages, mediated
disputes, and acted as an impartial spokesman. Of course, for these services
a Sho ka was rewarded with gifts. Even today, at the I’n Ion schscka dances,
the crier is not an Osage by blood. Each of the twenty-four clans had a
sub-clan that acted as Sho ka for its clan.

Often, captives were traded by the nation that captured them. It was not
unusual for a captive to be traded among three or more nations. The Osages
had acquired by trade three boys captured by the Comanche in Texas during
the early 1840s. Possession of these two boys involved the Osages in the
diplomatic affairs between the United States and the Republic of Texas.

Much of the background of this incident is given in a letter from T. Hart¬
ley Crawford of the War Department, Office of Indian Affairs, dated Janu¬
ary 12, 1843. This letter was sent to Major William Armstrong, acting
Superintendent of the Choctaw Agency west of Arkansas.

Sir

Information having been communicated to the State Department
by the Charge d’Affaires of Texas [Isaac Van Zandt] that his Govern¬
ment had been informed by a gentleman residing among the Osage
indians west of the State of Missouri that a youth some twelve years
of age who had been captured by indians in the county of Fayette
Texas named—Lyons is now among the Osage indians and within the
limits of the United States, I am requested by the Secretary of War to
instruct you to inquire for the captive lad above mentioned and to
obtain his release, and when released to place him in charge of the
commandant at Fort Gibson or Fort Towson, to be kept until called
for by an agent of the Texian Government.

You will therefore please to give the necessary instructions to the
subagent of the Osages, with as little delay as practicable and urge his

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 215

immediate and diligent attention to the release of young Lyons and to

the further instructions contained herein.

Very respectfully etc. 34

Subsequent to this letter, it was determined that the Osages held two
other boys in addition to Lyons. From this seemingly simple clear-cut be¬
ginning, this whole affair became a complicated diplomatic exchange be¬
tween the United States and the Republic of Texas.

The Republic of Texas agreed to allow three hundred dollars for each of
the boys. Two hundred dollars was spent on the purchase and one hundred
dollars for transportation and subsistence. As a result of this final incident of
a series of Indian problems between the United States and the Republic of
Texas, a council was held at Waco, Texas. The treaty made at this council
dealt with the problem of Indians raiding in one country and seeking sanc¬
tuary in the other. The practice of redemption was established in this Osage
case. Both the United States and the Republic of Texas heretofore had re¬
fused to pay for the release of captives. The belief was that such payment
would encourage the Indians to take captives as a business. Possibly, taking
children captive for the ransom was used at times, yet Osages wanted chil¬
dren to adopt. We found no Osage record of taking captives for ransom.

Continuing Warfare

While much of the vigor of Osage warfare was lost in the smallpox epi¬
demic of 1830-1831, they still carried on their warfare on the Plains. The
Kiowa gave the second spot on their calendar to note an Osage attack in the
summer of 1833. This was known as the “summer that they cut off their
heads” among the Kiowa. It is depicted as a knife below a severed head on
the Kiowa calendar. Omission of the Sundance symbol on the calendar for
the summers of 1833-1834 were due to the Osages taking the portable
shrines. By the summer of 1835, the Osages had returned the two shrines
and would accept no more than one pony for them because of the peace
then prevailing between themselves and the Kiowa. This is reflected in the
calendar during the summer of 1835 because the sundance lodge is dis¬
played with its open door (see Fig. 31). 35

This killing of the Kiowa was a massacre since the Kiowa did not make
much of a defensive stand. To make matters worse, it was an all black paint
or no quarter affair from the Osage point of view. It is probable that the
Little Osage chief Chetopa (Tse To pa or Four Lodges) acquired his name
from this event.

The Kiowa were camped at the mouth of Rainy Mountain Creek, which

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

216 / Osage Culture and United States’ Policy

iunrncr

.. Winter Smnmer

1 835-C/mail 1834-35--Bull- 1334 ^

rush »un daivtr kjilvd Return of

Cunpl'Ainft

Winter Summer Wtnjcr

1833-34- 1833-They cut 1832-33- Money captured
The stars ofT then heads
fen

Fig. 31. This portion of the Kiowa calendar is read from the right to the left. The first
summer depicted on the calendar refers to the massacre by the Osages (from 17th An¬
nual Report, BAE, Smithsonian).

is a tributary of the Washita River. Most of the warriors were away fighting
the Utes. The alarm was given when an Osage arrow was found in a buffalo.
The Kiowa broke camp and divided into four parties which fled in differ¬
ent directions.

One of the parties under Island Man stopped on Otter Creek about
twenty-five miles northwest of Fort Sill. Thinking the Osages had aban¬
doned pursuit, the Kiowa paused to rest. At first light the following morn¬
ing, the Osages struck the sleeping Kiowa. They fled to the rocks on the
mountainside nearby. Two children were captured and five men were killed.
A large number of women and children were also killed. It should be noted,
however, that the bodies of the slain were not mutilated other than by de¬
capitation.

Each head complete with its scalp was placed in a brass pot or bucket.
This is the only known account where the heads were not placed on stakes.
In Osage logic, it made sense to not only warn the Kiowa not to hunt in
Osage territory but also not to trade with the Pawnee. These brass pots were
acquired by the Pawnee north of the Osage territory and traded to the
Kiowa. The Osages wished to keep the southwestern trade for themselves.
The Republican Pawnee often competed for the southwestern trade.

Two facets of this attack must be mentioned. The brass kettles and the
fact that the Osages were afoot require some additional comment. Indians
such as the Osages who had direct trade contacts with Euro-American
goods had learned not to use brass and copper cookware. Such cookware
often generated copper poison and caused death over a period of time. Cast-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Culture and United States’ Policy / 217

iron cookware was safer, but it was too heavy to carry as a secondary trade
item. Thus, cookware made of sheet brass and copper was traded to the In¬
dians who did not have direct trade contact with Euro-Americans.

Because the Osages were afoot, we have a clear indication that this was
not a stray Osage hunting party that chanced upon the Kiowa. Clearly, this
was an Osage war party that was seeking the Kiowa. In all probability, they
were specifically after the Kiowa of Island Man’s band. Evidently, this group
had hunted in Osage territory. The Osages had a choice of four groups and
chose this particular group for some reason. Tracks would identify those
who violated Osage territory. 36

As an outgrowth of this incident, the Dragoon Expedition of 1833-1834
was organized. This was a visit by the First Dragoons in 1834, and it was the
first official relationship the Kiowa, Comanche, Wichita, and other Indians
had with the United States. Some returned to Fort Gibson with the dra¬
goons. There, a meeting of eastern and western Indians took place. As a
result, the following year, 1835, a peace meeting was held at Camp Holmes
(about five miles northeast of Purcell, Oklahoma). Finally, in the Treaty of
1837, the Osages, Kiowa, and others agreed to keep the peace. 37

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Search for Comprehension

BEGINNINGS OF FORMAL EDUCATION
Introduction

The death of Claremore II (Town Maker) brought out the conflict between
the desire to learn new things and the desire to retain the old culture. Clare-
more II was always friendly to the Protestant missionaries at Union, but he
refused to send his own children to the mission school. This friendly non¬
cooperation was never understood by the Protestant missionaries. They had
a fixed idea as to how the education of Osage children should be conducted
and made no effort to fit formal education into the Osage culture. All edu¬
cational adjustments were made by the Osages and none by the missionaries.

Claremore s death shows that people of both cultures were searching for
comprehension. It is one of humankinds curses that people cannot submerge
their own ethnocentrism and accept that of another culture. The Osages
considered their culture to be better than that of the Euro-Americans. Like¬
wise, Euro-Americans considered their culture to be superior to the Osage
culture. Under these conditions, neither the Osages nor the Protestant mis¬
sionaries reached a comprehension of the others’viewpoints.

After eleven or twelve years of effort, the Protestant Missions were
closed. Without a doubt, the missionaries felt they had failed. Certainly, they
did not bring the Osages to the unrealistic heights of the missionary dreams.
Yet, they accomplished a very difficult feat. They exposed the Osages to a
part of the Euro-American culture that had never before been seen by the
Osages. It is a shame that the missionaries were so self righteous and placed
such strong stress on buildings and fields and not on humanity.

On September 27, 1819, a delegation of Claremore’s bands went to Fort
Smith and delivered the following message: “All of you fathers,—I shake
hands with you, and the Great Spirit is witness that it is with a good heart.
In shaking hands with you, I embrace all my white brethren.”

Having, after this introduction, expressed their thanks to their great fa-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 219

ther in Washington for sending his white children to instruct them, and
signified their desires that their young men might be initiated in the me¬
chanic arts, their young women in domestic economy, and that all the young
people might be taught to read and write, they concluded by saying: “I shall
consider the house which our great father will build for the education of
our children our home, as we do this place. I wish our great father would
send us the teachers as soon as he can, with their necessary equipments. I
shook hands with our great father at Washington and still hold it fast. We
must all have one tongue.” 1

The Missouri bands could not let the Arkansas bands get the best of
them, so they too asked for schools. They sent Sans Nerf (Without Sinew) 2
with his chief counselor and highest warrior to Washington to plead their
case. 3 Because it suited the American policy of the moment, the delegation
was well received, and they attained an immediate response to their request.

The Civilization Act of 1820 had just been enacted. No better timing
could have been planned for the delegation. Their appeal, coming after a
two hundred mile trip, touched the American heart. The United Foreign
Missionary Society responded. While over one hundred persons volunteered
to be missionaries to the Osage, only forty were selected. Although they left
Pittsburgh on March 5, 1821, the first group did not arrive on the Neosho-
Grand until November of 1821. Travel was difficult, but most of the delay
was spent accumulating funds as they traveled. En route, people gave them
food, money, and supplies to help with their expenses. 4 This event was one
of those wonderful times when the American heart was touched without
limit.

Two of the seven Protestant Osage Missions were founded by the United
Foreign Missionary Society: Union and Harmony. Eventually, the three
Hopefield Missions, Neosho Mission, and Boudinot Mission grew out of
Union and Harmony. 5 However, by this time (1826) the United Foreign
Missionary Society had merged with the American Board of Commission¬
ers for Foreign Missions.

The Mission Schools

Christianity was the first consideration of the missionaries. Education was
secondary to their goal of making all Osages Christian. It is ironic that the
education of the Osages was about the only constructive, albeit small,
achievement of the missions. They utterly failed to convert the Osages. Al¬
though they all but missed achievement in education, at least they did have
a few modest successes.

Officially, the first pupils started school on August 27, 1821. 6 Most of
these students were Osage-French mixed-bloods. Whether the children
were mixed or full-blood, the most difficult problem was to keep them in

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

220 / Search for Comprehension

school. Enrollment remained small for this reason. Children would enroll,
stay a month or two, then leave, only to be replaced by a new wave of
pupils.

Warfare between the Osage and Cherokee complicated the educational
problems at Union. The Osages did not trust the missionaries to protect
their children and were constantly taking them out of school in the face of
Cherokee attacks. Throughout the history of the missions on the lower
Neosho-Grand no solution was ever found for this problem.

The early years were especially happy years at Harmony Mission. Possi¬
bly this was because of the absence of the Cherokee threat. Yet, the enthu¬
siasm and zeal of the missionaries were probably the more important reasons
for the period of happiness. No one could ever accuse these missionaries of
not trying to help the Osages. Their problem was their misdirected efforts
and failure to see the world through Osage eyes. So, it was with happiness
that Harmony opened its school in January of 1822.

A fragment of the Harmony school record of 1824-1825 has come down
to us (see Fig. 32). 7 Three pupils listed on the record are given as full-blood
Osage, but their names indicate they were mixed-bloods. One cannot help
noticing the presence of other Indian children who were not Osage. It
should be noted that, in part, these children were educated at the expense
of the Osages. In later days, the total cost of educating children in Osage
schools was paid by the Osages regardless of the child’s tribal affiliation.

Another aspect of these mission schools was the teaching of agriculture.
Right or wrong, the missionaries were convinced that the only hope for
survival of the Osages, and their Christian conversion, was by following the
plow and tilling the soil. Aside from producing the food needed to sustain
the missions, the agricultural lessons tended to make the students more will¬
ing to listen to the sermonizing. Yet, although there were a few mixed-
bloods enrolled in the agriculture classes, there were no full-bloods. The
missionaries could not know that the Osages would never be farmers. Their
affinity for animals led them into ranching instead of farming.

All three of the Hopefield Missions were devoted to teaching agriculture
and the other useful arts. Two of these Hopefield Missions were in Okla¬
homa and the last one was in Kansas. No two of the Hopefield Missions
existed at the same time. Boudinot Mission was almost entirely a religious
mission and never attempted to be an educational mission. Neosho Mission
was the first educational institution in Kansas. While it was an educational
Mission, it never reached the achievements of the Hopefield Missions.

Location of Missions

Union was the oldest of the Protestant Missions. It was located in Mayes
County, Oklahoma, five miles northeast of Mazie, Oklahoma. Hopefield

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 221

| HARMONY SCHOOL 1824-

-1825

Name

Admitted

Age

Descent

Catherine Strange

14 Jan 1822

Eng-Osage

Susan Larivive

12 Mar 1822

Sioux-Fr-Osage

Rebecca Williams

12 Mar 1822

Pawnee Fr Osage

Maiy Ludlow

12 Mar 1822

Pawnee -Fr-Osage

Louisa Anna Bean

12 Mar 1822

Pawnee -Fr-Osage

Maria Seward

22 Apr 1822

Osage

Mary Williams

10 Oct 1823

Osage-Eng

John B. Mitchell

11 Jul 1823

Osage-Fr

James Chouteau

10 Oct 1823

Osage-Fr

Julia Michael

11 Jull823

Osage-Fr

Lewis Michael

23 Feb 1824

Osage-Fr

Gabriel Marlow

6 Nov 1823

Fr-Pawnee 1

Augustus Chouteau

28 Jan 1824

Fr-Osage

Wm. C. Brownlee

12 Jun 1824

Delaware

Wm. Rogers

26 Jul 1824

Pawnee

John B. Packett

23 Aug 1824

Mother Saik [Sac]

John McDowell

2 Sep 1824

Osage

Mary E. Sibley

24 Oct 1824

Osage

Jane Renick

10 Aug 1824

Osage-Fr

Fig. 32. Several well-known mixed-blood families are represented in this list.

number one was approximately four miles north of Union on the left
bank of the Neosho-Grand. Hopefield number two was about one-half of
a mile southwest of Pensecola, Oklahoma. Hopefield number three was in
Labette County, Kansas. It was probably in the vicinity of Oswego, Kansas
(see Fig. 33). 8

Harmony Mission was located on the bank of the Marais des Cygnes
about five miles above the junction of the Marais des Cygnes with the Little
Osage-Marmaton. From this junction downstream, the combined streams
are called the Osage River. Neosho Mission was on the right bank of the
Neosho opposite of Shaw, Kansas. Boudinot Mission was in Neosho County,
Kansas, on the south side of Four Mile Creek, a short distance from its
mouth. 9

Failure of the Missions
The Ministers

It is difficult to find all the factors which caused the failure of the first
Osage missions. However, the ministers were of the wrong character to
work among the Osages and, therefore, became an important factor in fail¬
ure. Mathews relates a story that points out two characteristics of the min¬
isters, that is, their unwillingness to take advice and their inability to admit
merit in an opinion that differed from theirs.

Bill Williams had possibly been the first to act as a Protestant missionary

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

222 / Search for Comprehension

to the Osages. He had married into the tribe, spoke the language, and re¬
spected Osage beliefs. He tried to help the Protestant missionaries as an
interpreter and advisor. One Sunday he told the minister that the text se¬
lected for the sermon, which was the story of Jonah and the whale, was not
suitable for the Osages. He explained that it would undermine the ministers
credibility. However, the minister insisted on going ahead with the sermon
as planned.

The results were as Williams had predicted. One of the headmen arose
and said, “ We know the Heavy Eyebrows will lie, but this is the biggest lie
we ever heard;’ and with this he drew his robe about him and walked
swiftly away. The others stayed with their eyes closed and made no move,
but they stayed only from courtesy.” 10

Reverend Benton Pixley

The case of Reverend Benton Pixley not only exposes the Puritan charac¬
ter of the missionaries, but it also bares some problems they faced. No one
could doubt Reverend Pixley’s devotion and good intentions toward the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 223

Osages. His primary problems arose out of his character and his nearness to
success.

Being a product of New England in his day and time, it was natural for
Reverend Pixley to draw a distinct line between right and wrong as he saw
it. Accustomed to attacking all wrongs without any reservations, which was
laudable conduct in New England, Pixley attempted to apply the same con¬
duct on the Osage frontier. Apparently, he never grasped the realities of life
on the frontier, for he acted exactly as he would have acted if he had still
been in New England.

That Pixley would soon find himself in “hot water” with the Osages, the
fur traders, and the Osage Agent was predictable. He had hardly opened
Neosho Mission before the “pot began to boil.” Horse stealing, polygamy,
and worship of Wa kon ta might have been time-honored practices among
the Osages, but to Pixley they were contemptible evils.

His blunt, tactless assaults on these venerable Osage institutions not only
appalled the Osages but also made them downright angry. An angry Osage
is not desirable even today. In the 1820s and 1830s, it would have been a very
dangerous situation. Reverend Pixley was fortunate in being able to retire
to Missouri with his body and head intact. But if he rubbed the Osage fur
the wrong way, he flayed the fur traders.

Accusing the fur traders of discouraging the Osages from being farmers
was only the opening shot in a barrage of attacks. Pixley was right, of
course. Traders did not want the Osages to abandon the hunt, for this was
the source of the hides, tallow, and fur of their trade. If Pixley became suc¬
cessful in converting the Osages into agriculturists, the fur traders’ liveli¬
hood would fade away. However, being right only made the sting of Pixley s
attack smart more than if it had been false.

There were only five groups of people on the Osage frontier between
1820 and 1840: (1) Indians; (2) government employees, such as Agents, mill¬
ers, and blacksmiths; (3) traders; (4) intruder settlers; and (5) missionaries.
Pixley managed to antagonize all these groups, except the missionaries.
However, we must mention that some Jesuit letters contain more than a few
harsh words about him. Even his fellow missionaries had several less-than-
kind remarks about him in their letters.

A deluge of letters to the government and to the Board of Commission¬
ers followed each of Reverend Pixley s assaults. Neosho Mission was closed,
and Pixley retired to Missouri to await reassignment. Without a doubt the
problems with Reverend Pixley affected the ultimate decision by the Board
of Commissioners to close all the Osage Missions in 1837. The Osage peti¬
tion for their removal also had a bearing. It is a pity that so many good
intentions were lost in a sea of problems and personality conflicts.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

224 / Search for Comprehension

An Osage petition sets forth their feelings toward the missionaries. This
petition is in the classical Osage style of address. In ta die (father) is still used
today in formal Osage speeches. This letter was drafted at White Hairs
Town, August 25, 1828.

Father, From the moment the missionaries came among us we gave
them the hand of friendship.

Father, We gave them our land, we gave them our children.

Father, We moved our people toward the setting sun and left the mis¬
sionaries two days march toward the rising sun.

Father, One of them followed us, and has been living on our land
though we gave them enough land for all of them to live on.

Father, We do not wish him to live here.

Father, He has quarrelled with our men and women and we hear he
has also quarrelled with the white men who our Great Father has sent
here to do us good and to live among us.

Father, We have enough of the white people among us without him,
even if he was good, but he is a bad man, is doing no good here, but
a evil, is living on our land, quarrels with our men and women, forgets
his black coat and fights them, finds faults with all, disturbs our peace,
and many other things which you know and we have not time now
to tell you.

Father, We hope you will make him leave our country.

Father, The missionaries at Harmony are near enough, we do not wish
them to come to our land to live.

Father, We hope you may live long and be happy, and we sign ourselves
to this paper.

(Signed)

Pa hu ska, White Hair

Chin ga wa sa, Fine Bird [Shin ka Wa sa, Pretty Bird]

First Counsellor Ha ra tia, War Eagle
[Hu iah Ta ke]

First war leader Wa no pa she, Fearless
Great warrior

[All above are signed by mark]

Signed in presence of
P. L. Chouteau, sub-agent
N. Pryor, sub-agent
B. Morgan, interpreter 11

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 225

Other Factors of Failure

The closing of Fort Osage and the federal trading post in 1822 had a det¬
rimental effect in the Osage fur trade. Despite its faults, the government
post had acted as a brake on the excesses of the fur traders. With the closing
of Fort Osage, anything that seemed a threat to the fur trade was crushed.
Thus, the fur trade alone was enough to defeat the Protestant missionaries.

Yet, there were other factors working against the missionaries and their
efforts to Christianize the Osages. The Treaty of 1825 removed the Osages
from both Union and Harmony. That is, the Osages were relocated far north
of Union and forty or fifty miles west of Harmony. This was a great dis¬
tance in the 1820s, and it made ready contact between the Osage and the
missionary schools difficult.

The federal policy of massing the Osages into a series of compact vil¬
lages clustered near the Agency was not conducive to agricultural pur¬
suits. Agriculture must of necessity spread out in order to have land to
cultivate. Without a doubt, the agricultural-minded missionaries and the
administrative-minded agents had good intentions. Yet, the two policies
conflicted and the missionaries lost.

Ultimately, it was the Osages who paid the price of compaction into
village clusters. We will deal with this problem in a later chapter. However,
we would like to point out that the terrible epidemics experienced by the
Osages grew out of this compaction practice. Also, the compaction placed a
heavy burden on the available wild food plants. Combined with the slavery
controversy in Kansas and the subsequent Civil War, this caused famine
among the Osages.

By the end of 1837, the last Protestant Osage Mission was closed. For ten
years, the people had no mission or school. Apparently, the Osages had
mixed feelings about the missionaries and the schools. It was a gigantic step
from the Osage culture to the Euro-American culture. While they knew
that the change must be made, the habit of past generations kept calling
them to the freedom of the clean Plains and the hunt. Like a confirmed
smoker, they could put aside their habit for a time, but the memories of past
pleasures lured them back to their old addiction.

Being torn by an awareness of the need for change only made the old
free life of the past dearer in the Osage heart. Thus, their actions were con¬
fusing to the missionaries, who had never experienced such a conflict. How
can anyone who has never stood in two worlds grasp the terrible dilemma
goring them at every turn? William Shakespeare touches on a similar prob¬
lem in Flamlet.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

226 / Search for Comprehension

To be, or not to be—that is the question:

Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,

And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep—

No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to. ’Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die—to sleep.

To sleep—perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub!

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,

Must give us pause. There’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life. 12

Hamlet solved his dilemma by revenge; the Osages sought peace of mind
on the Plains by drinking deeply the last draught of the past. Most people
never miss what they have until it is gone. The Osages knew their way of
life was passing, and they longed for it before it passed. It is not that the ways
of the Osages were incomprehensible; it was that the Euro-Americans of the
time were not capable of comprehending.

A new beginning was coming to the Osages. It was clear the Euro-
Americans had at least some grasp of the Osage mind. Possibly, the ability
to curb the self enabled the Jesuits to reach out and touch the Osage soul.
Certainly, the surface resistance to change had been abraded away by the
Protestant missionaries. In any event, the Osages had started the long, hard
journey into the Euro-American world.

THE BLACK ROBES
Introduction

In a petition to President Tyler dated June 14,1843, the Osages pointed out
the Osage education fund created from the sale of lands under the Treaty of
1825. 13 Since it was their money, to be spent on education, the Osages spe¬
cifically asked for Catholic missionaries. They also pointed out that their
subagent, R. A. Calloway, was opposed to missionaries. Being well aware of
the “spoils system” as practiced by Calloway, the Osages could only hope he
would be removed. The opposition of their agent and the fur traders, includ¬
ing the failure of the Protestant Missions, tended to push the Osages to the
Jesuits. Thus, the casual relationship between the Osages and the Catholic
Church became more intense.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 227

Despite the policies set in Washington for the “civilization” of the Indian,
there were more effective forces working against assimilation into Western
civilization. So long as the Osages were a prime source of furs and hides,
the fur traders encouraged them to live by the hunt. Typical of this attitude
is the story of the Osage who was asked why he did not become a farmer.
His reply was, “I can buy all the grain I need for a year with one buffalo
hide.” Traders well knew that such arguments would find a wide acceptance
among the Osages.

Too often agents were selected because of loyalty to the party in power.
And, aside from the party controlling the government, they were selected to
reflect the Euro-American views instead of the Indian view. Treaty provi¬
sions usually involved sizable sums of money for that day and time. These
funds were large enough to be a major attraction to those with greedy am¬
bitions. Very few agents were willing to kill “the goose that laid such golden
eggs.”

It was unfortunate that the intruders who settled on Osage lands were
such poor examples of the Euro-American ideal. A casual look at their type
of agriculture, their subculture, and their absolute poverty would be enough
to discourage any emulation. Very few Osages ever became farmers. Possibly,
these intruders created such an aversion to agriculture among the Osages
that it is still being handed down to the present generations. Most Osages
found the step to ranching more to their liking. It is probable that they
instinctively took this important step instead of leaping directly into agri¬
culture. We are assuming herding is a necessary prelude to agriculture. How¬
ever, the Osages were naturally drawn to ranching because of their love of
animals. They were shrewd observers of animal habits and, thus, were well
qualified to be cattlemen.

Finally, the eastern nations were rapidly surrounding the Osages. The ef¬
fects of the advancing American frontier affected more than the Indians
on the frontier line. Like ripples spreading out from a stone thrown in water,
the impact touched nation after nation until those on the remote shore
of the Pacific felt the shock. We would estimate that somewhat more than
ninety percent of the Eastern Indians who were removed west of the Mis¬
sissippi were eventually settled on what had been Osage territory.

Being centrally located as they were, the Osages were accustomed to a
diversity of Indian cultures. However, with so many varied cultures being
added to the natural cultures, they were hard put to cope with them effec¬
tively. At the same time, the compaction into increasingly smaller areas also
complicated the problem. Surely, the multitude of Indian experiences re¬
flecting Euro-American failures in “civilization” experiments were no in¬
ducement for the Osages to become another failure.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

228 / Search for Comprehension

These factors—the traders, the agents, the intruders, and the Indian refu¬
gees from “civilization”—were all forces working against Osage acceptance
of Euro-American culture. When one adds the reluctance to give up their
own culture—which had features superior to the Euro-American culture—
one must wonder how the Osages changed as quickly as they did. These
were the odds against the Jesuits as they undertook the task of bringing the
people into the folds of Christianity and introducing them to the arts, sci¬
ences, and crafts of Western civilization.

Establishing Osage Mission

The Osages had been familiar with the Jesuits, whom they called Black
Robes, almost from their first contact with Euro-Americans. While many
marriages between the French traders and Osage women were performed
under Osage law, some were performed by the Jesuits as early as 1750. It was
natural for them to want the familiar Jesuits as their teachers.

They had invited Bishop Louis W V Du Bourg to visit their villages in
1820. Bishop Du Bourg made an attempt to secure Jesuits in 1821, but he
was not successful until March of 1823. 14 Although Fr. Charles De La Croix
started working among the Osages in 1820, his health broke in 1822. A
group of Jesuits came from Whitemarsh, Maryland, under Fr. Charles Van
Quickenborne, who led the group of Jesuits from Maryland to Missouri. He
and Fr. Peter J. Timmermans guided seven novices in Missouri. These were:
(1) Judocus Van Assche; (2) Peter John De Smet; (3) Peter John Verhaegen;
(4) John Babtiste Smedts; (5) Francis De Maillet; (6) Felix Livinus Verreydt;
and (7) John Anthony Elet. Also, there were three lay brothers: Peter De
Meyer, Henry Reiselman, and Charles Strahan. 13 It is interesting to note
that of these twelve Jesuits three served among the Osages.

Yet, from this small nucleus a total of eighty-four Jesuits eventually
worked among the Osages. Fr. De Smet (called “the little flower of the prai¬
rie”) is often mentioned in general histories of the United States, and he is
always mentioned in the history of the American West. Thus, he is probably
the best known of the Jesuits that worked with the Osages. The reason he
is mentioned in the histories is probably because he worked among the na¬
tions of the Upper Missouri. Therefore, he stood in the path of the flow of
migration to Oregon and California. By contrast, the Jesuits who worked
among the Osages were in the shadow of the Osage blockade and their
work went unnoticed by the general histories.

At first, it was thought that the Indian boys would come to Florissant,
Missouri, to attend St. Regis Seminary. 16 Iron Hawk, the fourth White Hair
chief, and Not Afraid of the Pawnee, father to Governor Joe, did attend
St. Regis. The first Red Corn, sometimes called Bill Nix or Bill Mathis,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Search for Comprehension / 229

also attended St. Regis. However, there were few Indians at the school, and
even fewer Osages. St. Regis and the girl’s school both operated without
government funds and the expense per pupil was overwhelming. 17

Fifty-four sections of land had been set aside for Osage education and
training under the Treaty of 1825. Selling these lands was a condition re¬
quired by the American government in return for the Treaty of 1839. It was
the proceeds from the sale of these lands that supported the Protestant Mis¬
sions. Under the agreement between the Osages and the United States, the
funds derived from the sale of these lands were to be administered at the
discretion of the President.

Between 1839 and 1847, the interest from these Education Funds was
merely dissipated. That is, it was spent on farm equipment that the Osages
could not use and programs that yielded no benefits to them. All bene¬
fits were in favor of the Americans. It seems this education fund of the
Osages was used to pay political debts.

By the spring of 1843, the Osages were petitioning the Commissioner of
Indian Affairs for Jesuit Missionaries. The Commissioner wanted no part
of either the Osages or the Jesuits. Evidently, the commissioner was tired of
both the Osages and the Jesuits. He informed the Osage agent to discourage
a visit by the Osages but to construct a suitable schoolhouse. In addition, he
stated his intention to hire a schoolmaster who was not the minister of any
faith. 18

Major Thomas H. Harvey, the new Superintendent, was among the
Osages in May of 1844. The Osages used this event to push their desire for
the Black Robes. They argued that the government was not living up to the
promises made to them. Furthermore, they pointed out the benefits the
Potawatomi were receiving. Hence, Major Harvey recommended granting
the Osage request. An abrupt shift in policy was made, and the Jesuits were
invited to establish a mission among the Osages. 19

On August 8, 1845, the contract for the erection of two school buildings
was granted. Fifty acres of plowing was also included. By January of 1846,
this work was finished. However, the school did not officially open until
May 10, 1847. 20

The United States was reluctant to pay Osage education monies to the
Jesuits. After examining the monies offered the Jesuits for an Osage school,
the Jesuits refused to sign the contract. Shocked by the rejection, the Com¬
missioner “found” more money and the Jesuits accepted the mission. At least
fifty-five dollars per pupil was available, but only fifty dollars per pupil was
paid to the Jesuits. Financial problems, government “red tape,” and travel
difficulties delayed the arrival of the missionaries until April 28, 1847. 21

Believing that it would be a waste of funds and effort to educate an

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

230 / Search for Comprehension

Osage boy who could only marry an uneducated Osage girl, the Jesuits also
instigated a girls’ school. The Sisters of Loretto from Nerinckx (present-day
Nerinx), Kentucky, established the girls’ school. Mother Concordia and her
assistants, Sister Mary Petronilla, Sister Bridget, and Sister Vincentia arrived
at the mission on October io, 1847. 22 Thus, Osage Mission and the Osage
Indian School were established. 23

The establishment of Osage Mission marks the end of an era in Osage
history. With the coming of the Americans came a decline in Osage power
and culture. Within forty years, the heart of America passed from Osage
control. Simultaneously, many forces were altering Osage culture until by
1847 it bore little resemblance to what it had been in 1800.

Fortune placed Fr. Schonmakers and his Jesuits among the Osages at a
critical point in their history. Without the Mission, it is doubtful if the
Osages would have survived the span of time between 1850 and 1870.
Decimated and weakened by devastating epidemics, swept up into the frat¬
ricidal slavery controversy, and torn by the loss of their way of life, only the
Jesuits stood between the Osages and the Four Horsemen. 24

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART THREE

Facing the Four Horsemen,

1850-1865

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes

the People

INTRODUCTION

Background

And behold a pale horse: and he that sat upon him, his name was death.

And hell followed him. And power was given to him over the four
parts of the earth, to kill with sword, with famine and with death and
with the beasts of the earth.

In the ordeal of the 1850s and 1860s the Osages were fortunate to have
three factors working for them. These were Andrew J. Dorn, their agent;
the Jesuits; and the school at Osage Mission. These three factors were the
counterbalance that saved the Osages from extinction in this period.

To the Old Osages, there were seven bends in the River of Life. Each of
these bends represented a crisis in ones own lifetime. In a larger sense, the
River of Life was also applied to the people as a whole. The myths tell us
of the first crisis of the Osages—when they met a strange warlike nation.
After a long series of wars with these people, the Osages emerged victorious.
Surely, the 1850s and 1860s were another bend in the River of Life for the
Osage people. However, we do not know which bend it represents.

Reservation policies of the United States government had a serious ef¬
fect on the Osages. Bunching the people together in many small villages
clustered near the agency was a convenience to the government. It was,
however, an open invitation to epidemics. Aside from the ease of spreading
a disease, the compacting of villages concentrated human wastes into a
small area and overworked the supply of local wild food plants. Thus, not

The epigraph is from “The Apocalypse of St.John The Apostle” 6:1-8, Douay version.
The pale horse was a pale sickly green and while it had death as its rider, the horse
represented plagues or pestilence.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

234 / Pestilence Strikes the People

only was there an increase in population density, but there was also a grow¬
ing sanitation and nutrition problem.

No other period in Osage history shows a greater fluctuation in popula¬
tion. Epidemic after epidemic struck the people. Each epidemic was fol¬
lowed by a surge in the birthrate. While the next epidemic took most of
these newborns, a few survived to carry the Osage blood to the next gen¬
eration. The people met pestilence, the pale horse of the Apocalypse, and
survived.

The Neosho Agency

In 1849, Indian Affairs was transferred from the War Department to the
newly created Department of the Interior. A reorganization of the old agen¬
cies took place in 1851. Hence, Neosho Agency was created by combining
the former Neosho and Osage subagencies. Major Andrew J. Dorn began his
duties as the Neosho agent in 1849 and served until 1861. 1

Major Dorn was born in New York state, but he was residing in Missouri
when he was appointed to the Neosho Agency. He was highly esteemed by
the Osages, the missionaries, the traders, and the settlers. Everyone had such
a high regard for him that the original combined Neosho and Labette
Counties in Kansas was given Dorn as its name. However, after the Civil
War, when the original county was broken up into two counties, neither
Labette nor Neosho County would retain the Dorn County name. Possibly
this was because Andrew J. Dorn served in the Confederate Indian Depart¬
ment. Rumors state that he was responsible for forming the Confederate
Indian brigade and the invasions into Southeast Kansas.

Clearly, Major Dorn was the first Indian agent who was sympathetic to
the Osage viewpoints. The BIA files are full of his letters on their behalf. In
his decade or more of service to the Osages, there is not one letter against
him from the Osages. He must be the only Osage agent to receive this
unusual honor.

With the terrible decade ahead for the people, having such an agent as
Dorn was crucial. He did his very best to see that they had the medical care
that they desperately needed. Perhaps his greatest service was to fight for
cash payment of the annuities so that all the goods did not go to the Osage
leaders. In fact, he also had to fight to have the annuities paid in some sem¬
blance of an orderly schedule. Erratic payment, if they were made at all,
characterized earlier payments. This threw the people into a terrible posi¬
tion and inflicted unusual hardships upon them.

Osage Mission

The Jesuits and Sisters of Osage Mission, probably more than any other out¬
side factor, were responsible for the survival of the Osage people. It is no

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 235

small wonder that eighty percent of the Osages are still Catholic today.
These dedicated souls accomplished more than they lived to realize. Their
influence on the souls and aspirations of the Osage people is still present
today.

When the Osages established the oldest Catholic parish in Oklahoma,
they had a little white church on Bird Creek. After the little white church
was taken in a flood, they built a fine brick church, which recently wit¬
nessed the Centennial of the Parish. By special dispensation, the Osages
were allowed to depict the coming of Fr. John Schonmakers in the stained
glass windows of this church. These windows remind all Osages of the im¬
portant role Osage Mission played in the lives of the people.

While Fr. Schonmakers had a special place in Osage hearts, it was Fr. John
Bax who reached to the core of their being. They called him “Father Who
is All Heart.” Many Osages said he spoke Osage better than themselves.
Fr. De Smet credited Fr. Bax with baptizing 2,000 Indian adults and chil¬
dren during his five years at Osage Mission. 2 A casual look at the Osage
Mission Register more than verifies this assessment by Fr. De Smet. 3

No one labored harder or nursed the stricken more tenderly in the epi¬
demic of 1852 than Fr. Bax. Weakened by his efforts to aid the people, he
too succumbed to the disease. His interment record states:

On the 5th of August 1852 died at Fort Scott 1 1/2 A.M. Rev.J.J.

Bax, S.J. on the 6th of the same month he was burried in the graveyard

of St. Francis Mission on the Neosho. He was borne the 15 of Jan.

1817, received in the Society on the 19th of November 1840.

J. B. Miege, S.J. 4

That Bishop Miege officiated at Fr. Bax’s interment is a significant fact.
His see was at St. Mary’s Mission of the Potawatomi, and it included all of
Indian Territory.

Fr. Bax had dedicated his life to the Osages. As he lay dying, his last
words to his assistant, Fr. Paul Ponziglione were, “Father, take care of my
children.” 3 He left “his children” in good hands. To most older Osages of
our acquaintance, Fr. Ponziglione was a living saint.

Fr. Ponziglione left Osage Mission in 1889. He was at Marquette College
for seven months, and then he was sent to St. Stephen’s Mission among the
Arapahoe in Wyoming. After nearly two years at St. Stephen’s, he was sent
to St. Ignatius College in Chicago. Fr. Ponziglione died in Chicago on
March 28, 1900. 6

The school at Osage Mission taught the usual academic subjects. In the
manual labor division, the boys were taught agriculture and the girls were
taught needlework. Like the Protestant missionaries before them, the Jesuits

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

236 / Pestilence Strikes the People

had to search hard for signs of progress. Yet, in time, they witnessed many of
their former students well settled in life, a tribute to their success.

In a letter to A. J. Dorn, Fr. Schonmakers states his philosophy toward
teaching agriculture to the Osages. 7

28 August 1856

I do not think that to establish farms in the midst of our Osages
could have a benefical effect upon their character, certainly not if they
be carried out on a liberal scale; our Indians will be mere spectators,
admire the industry and avarice of the farmers, which will not excite
their partiality for agricultural pursuits; they will only study on the
abuse made of their money, and devise means to rid themselves of
their pretended benefactors, which will ultimately lead [them] to burn
the improvements.

As an alternative to this demonstration farm idea, Fr. Schonmakers estab¬
lished small plots and paid the boys for the work they performed.

The effectiveness of this method was evident in the statistics. There
were five Osage farms on the Neosho in 1847 when the Jesuits established
Osage Mission. In 1855, this number had increased to twenty-five. While a
twenty-farm increase in eight years may seem small, it does indicate a sig¬
nificant advancement. 8

One must bear in mind two facts. First, it had taken over two hundred
years to establish the first five farms. Second, it took a few years for the
students to reach adulthood and to establish their own farms. However, even
at this time, the Osage farmers were showing a greater preference for animal
husbandry than for tillage of the soil.

As a result of frequent raids by Euro-Americans during the War in Kan¬
sas and the ensuing Civil War, several bands of Osages had moved to the
Verdigris Valley. A flood of intruders quickly occupied the old village sites.
The Jesuits could see the future of the Osages by observing this trend. The
Treaty of 1865, or Canville Treaty, placed the Osage villages forty or fifty
miles farther from Osage Mission. The Osage educational annuities were so
diluted that by the time they reached the Jesuits it was only half enough. At
least half the cost of Osage education was provided by the Jesuit order. Be¬
cause of the trend toward more distant removal and lack of funds, the Jesuits
were forced to abandon their position among the Osages.

The growing realization that the shrinking Osage population would no
longer justify a mission possibly had a bearing on the abandonment. Then
again, the Osages probably had reached a point where they had to make the
step from the past to the future without guidance from the Jesuits. Fr. Schon-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 237

makerss statement in a letter to A.J. Dorn dated 28 August 1856 was more
than a little prophetic: “Our Osages are well aware that their former mode
of living is fast closing upon them; ten years ago they numbered 5,000
souls, at present they hardly exceed 3,500.’’ 9

Fr. Schonmakers s last visit among the Osages shows the high esteem they
had for him. He visited the Osage villages on the present reservation during
the last of July and the first half of August in 1875. In the night of August
11 he became very ill, and, although he was attended by the Agency doctor,
his condition was critical.

Being uneasy about him, the Osages crowded around his bed. When the
doctor asked them to leave, they threatened to scalp him if Fr. Schonmakers
died. Finally, a compromise was reached. Two Osages at a time watched the
doctor and Fr. Schonmakers until he had recovered enough to make the
return trip to Osage Mission. Fr. Schonmakers died over a decade later at
Osage Mission, on Saturday about four o’clock in the afternoon of July 28,
1883. Over 3,500 people attended his funeral. 10

Fr. Ponziglione’s last visit to the Osages was described as follows: “Father
Paul M. Ponziglione passed thru Elgin [Kansas] on Tuesday on his way from
Chicago, where he has been stationed for two years, to Pawhuska, the capital
city of the Osages, which he has for years taken so lively an interest in. The
good old gentleman carries his seventy-eight years lightly and looks no
older than twenty-five years ago when we used to see him in his little
covered wagon on his regular trips from Osage Mission to visit the tribes
on their reservation south of us.” 11

THE EPIDEMICS
Introduction

If it be the present policy of the administration to confine the
Osages to a small tract of country, it ought to be carried out with
generous liberality. Our Indians know well that they are born free by
nature, and will not easily submit to coercive systems.” 12

As Fr. Schonmakers feared in the quote above, the Osages were confined
to increasingly smaller areas. Even in 1856 when he wrote these words, the
problems of compaction were affecting the Osages.

As an administrative convenience, the Osages were bunched together in
a number of small villages. Centuries of experience had taught the Osages
to spread out for the sake of sanitation and that large villages should only
be allowed for defense. Osage myths stressed the idea of sanitation, which
was strictly followed until Western influence undermined the old customs.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

238 / Pestilence Strikes the People

Through custom, Osage villages were kept clean of debris and waste. This
was accomplished by carrying such matter some distance from the village.
In time, a mound of waste material, referred to as the outskirts of the vil¬
lage, grew around the village. All purification ceremonies were conducted
beyond the outskirts of the village.

Osage women took special pride in keeping a clean, orderly lodge. Men,
women, and children took frequent baths, even in the winter. Many older
Osages broke the ice on a stream to take a bath. Compaction placed the
village outskirts very close to overlapping each other and encouraged poor
sanitation practices. Personal cleanness became less important as tolerance
for human odors became more developed because of association with Euro-
Americans. So a major cause of Osage epidemics was the compaction into
a small area.

The settlers were possibly a major cause of Osage epidemics, but na¬
tive nations also transmitted epidemics. Certainly, the emigrant Cherokee
brought at least one epidemic to the Osages. With equal certainty, the
Quapaw and Comanche each caused at least one epidemic. However, settlers
and troops were almost surely the ultimate source of the epidemics.

Diseases that had only a mild effect on Euro-Americans because of their
inherited immunity had devastating effects on the Osages, who had no im¬
munity. At the same time, those diseases that were severe on Euro-Americans
were even more severe among the Osages. Lacking resistance to the diseases
of Western civilization, the Osages contracted these diseases with greater
ease and frequency than Euro-Americans.

The conflicts of the white people had a terrible effect on the Osages.
One could say with more than a little truth that the Indians generally, and
the Osages specifically, paid a terrible price for the freedom of blacks. Their
being on the doorsill of the first bloodshed by the Euro-Americans was
unfortunate for the Osages.

In Kansas history, the first burst of this insanity is called the Wakarusa
War. Most of the general histories refer to it as the War in Kansas. Stephen
A. Douglas sponsored the Kansas-Nebraska Bill in the hopes of taking the
slavery controversy out of Congress and placing it into the territories. While
it did not remove the controversy from the halls of Congress, it certainly
brought it into the territory of Kansas and, thus, laid it upon the backs of
the Osages.

We will deal with this conflict later, but we must mention that between
1852 and 1870 (eighteen years) the Osages could not leave their villages
unguarded. That is, they could not engage in the two grand hunts for the
buffalo each year, and they were limited in the grand winter hunt. This is
not to say they did not hunt buffalo, deer, and bear, but large-scale hunts

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 239

Known Osage Epidemics

Year

Disease

Deaths

1829

influenza

total for

1831

influenza

1829 to

1834

cholera

1843

1837

smallpox

1.242

1852

scurvy

total for

1852

measles

1852

typhoid

800

1855

smallpox

400

1856

scrofula

100

Fig. 34. Notice the cluster in 1852.

were impossible and there were no grand hunts. The impact on the people
was immediate and devastating. Dietary deficiencies were severe and pro¬
longed. Thus, we have another cause for the severe epidemics experienced
by the Osages.

Early Epidemics

We have no extremely early accounts of epidemics among the Osages.
Chances are that they had a few epidemics through most of the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries. Certainly, they were indirectly and directly ex¬
posed to Euro-American diseases by the mid-i6oos (see Fig. 34).

The first mention of Osage epidemics to be found were mentioned by
Grant Foreman, who reports: “During the years 1829 and 1831 the Osage
had suffered much from a prevailing epidemic called by the people, ‘the
cold plague or influenza,’ from which hundreds had died.” 13 One of the
most widely mentioned of the earlier epidemics was the cholera epidemic
of 1834.

The year 1833 was one of extensive floods on the Great Plains and its
eastern borders. The following year was marked by severe drought in the
same areas. Such conditions tend to foster epidemics. When Jackson forced
the removal of the eastern Cherokee to former Osage lands, they brought
the cholera with them. By the summer of 1834, the Osages and other Plains
nations were seized by a cholera epidemic. 14

Foreman reported that in September of 1834 the Osages were dying by
the hundreds from cholera. He later gave an estimate that between three
and four hundred Osages died of cholera in this year. 15

Tillie Karns Newman gives us an interesting, but confusing, account. She
reports that “the population of the Osages in 1829 was estimated at five
thousand. In 1843, when there was a recount, it was found that only thirty-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

240 / Pestilence Strikes the People

seven hundred and fifty-eight were living. Smallpox had taken a big toll of
the Osages and they were seeking health in other localities.” 1 '’ This state¬
ment is correct, but it may give the impression that 1,242 Osages died of
smallpox between 1829 and 1843. The population estimates given would
include the deaths from the influenza epidemic of 1829-1831 and the chol¬
era epidemic of 1834, as well as the smallpox epidemic of ca. 1837. We
might add that although the Osage population dropped somewhat in the
1840s, it was back to 5,000 by 1850, according to other sources.

Epidemics of the 1850s

On May 20, 1853, Fr. Schonmakers wrote to the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs. He informed the Commissioner that upon the urgent request of
the Quapaw leaders and the Neosho Agent, he had admitted twenty-four
Quapaw children to the Osage Mission school. He informed the Commis¬
sioner that he could accept no more Quapaw pupils and would have to dis¬
miss those now enrolled unless the school was paid fifty-five dollars per year
for each Quapaw pupil. 17

The presence of these Quapaw pupils at Osage Mission in 1852 was the
immediate cause of the major epidemic of 1852. On about March 1, a
Quapaw came to the Mission to visit his daughter. He seemed to be ill the
next day, and upon examination it was determined that he had the black
measles. Although he was moved far from the mission, by evening some pu¬
pils were showing symptoms of the disease. Possibly the coming of a warm
early spring after a harsh winter encouraged the disease. 18

By 1850, the number of Osage children had increased. The winter of
1851-1852 was severe, and shortly after the beginning of 1852 scurvy be¬
came widespread among the Osages. Then the measles epidemic broke out
in the spring. As summer ripened, typhoid fever struck the people. Over half
of the Osage children and many adults died in 1852 of at least one of these
three afflictions. In total, over 800 Osages died in 1852. 19

The Osages hardly had time to bury their dead before the next epidemic
struck. Unlike typhoid fever in the terrible times of 1852, smallpox was a
major epidemic in its own right in 1855. No one has described the circum¬
stances behind this epidemic better than Sister Fitzgerald, who begins her
account, “Late in November [1854] the Little Osage were returning from
the fall hunt.” 20 (Because the quote is long we will paraphrase the remain¬
der.) Three of the braves spotted a small Comanche camp. The Little Osage,
seeking revenge for an old insult, planned an attack at dawn. However, the
Comanche had detected the Osages and baited a trap. Slipping away in the
darkness of the night, they left an old man who was dying of smallpox.
He was dressed in rich robes and had fine weapons about him. When the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 241

Osages struck at dawn they killed the old man and stripped him. Carrying
the plunder of the Comanche camp, they left the Cimarron and returned to
their village. The following spring smallpox broke out in the Little Osage
village and quickly spread to the other villages.

Major Dorn engaged “Dr. Edwin Griffith of Jasper County, Missouri, to
vaccinate and care for the Osages.” Although most Osages had been vacci¬
nated in 1837, a whole generation had grown up without vaccination since
that time. “In his report to Dorn Dr. Griffith said he travelled 450 miles (he
had to overtake one band of Osages who had departed on their spring hunt)
and altogether vaccinated over two thousand Osages. As the plague subsided
he instructed the Chiefs how to vaccinate those tribesmen he had missed.” 21
This epidemic of smallpox killed an estimated four hundred Osages. 22

One would think the pale horse, pestilence, and his rider, death, had taken
enough Osage lives. Yet, they still rode roughshod through the Osage vil¬
lages. Pestilence dug deep into his bag of woe and brought forth scrofula, a
tuberculous condition with enlargement and degeneration of the lymphatic
glands, especially those of the neck. A common name for the disease is the
king’s evil.

On September 4,1856, Major A. J. Dorn wrote to Charles W Dean, who
was his superintendent, saying, “I would speak of the very considerable
sickness that has prevailed among the Osages, and by which I would sup¬
pose there had at least one hundred of them died. The disease that has pre¬
vailed among them was said to be scrofula, and I learn that it has almost
entirely abated since they scattered on the spring hunt.” 23 Scrofula lingered
among the Osages until allotment in 1906. Ho ta Moie (Comes Roaring) (or
“John Stink,” as he was called), supposedly was buried because he was un¬
conscious from a severe scrofula attack and was thought to have been dead.
Actually, people avoided him because he had scrofula, which caused an of¬
fensive body odor. In time, he overcame the disease, but he chose to remain
an outcast the rest of his life.

Tuberculosis in many forms became common among the Osages. Being
crowded into compact areas and still trying to follow a way of life they
had followed for centuries created an ideal environment for the disease to
grow. The dirt floors of their lodges were covered with mats, but there
were always dust motes in the air of the lodge. In happier times, this made
little difference, since most of the day was spent in the open air and the
tubercular germ did not exist in the Osage country until the coming of
the white man.

With so many intruders around, the Osages were increasingly spending
more time in their villages. As their time in the villages increased, time
in the clean air of the hunt decreased. Thus, the increased time in foul air

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

242 / Pestilence Strikes the People

and growth of nearby waste and debris became a heaven on earth for the
tubercle bacillus.

POPULATION

Closely related to the epidemics is the matter of population. When consid¬
ering populations, both the overall numbers and fluctuations are significant.
The major problem in any consideration of the Osage population is the
availability of reliable figures. One would think the Osage Annuity Rolls,
which start ca. 1834 and run to the turn of the century, would have accurate
counts since they involved payment of treaty monies. However, this was not
the case, since each annuity payment missed at least one hundred or more
Osages. Furthermore, they sometimes included non-Osages. The census rolls,
which started in 1885 and ran to 1940, are equally faulty, although after
1906 they are reasonably reliable.

One difficulty in obtaining accurate Osage population figures was the
tendency of Euro-Americans to consistently underestimate Indian popula¬
tions. This practice was not the result of any Osage action, but it was the
refusal of Euro-Americans to believe that the Osage civilization could
support a larger population than their estimates. Also, the Osages con¬
stantly patrolled their vast empire and had exploring parties out. Some¬
where around one-fourth of its fighting force and families were always away
from the villages. Thus, even the more reliable figures are probably off by
one-fourth.

Some idea of the Osage population can be obtained from the earliest es¬
timates before the practice of reducing Indian population estimates started.
In 1680, Hennepin recorded that the Osages had seventeen villages, and
Coxe, in 1770, places the number at seventeen to eighteen villages. 24 From
archaeological studies and written records, we know the Osage villages var¬
ied in size from 500 to 3,000 people. It seems that an average of 1,000
people per village would not be an unreasonable assumption. Thus, a popu¬
lation of 17,000 to 18,000 is suggested to at least 1800 (see Fig. 35).

There was some “bleeding off” of individuals and groups of Osages
who joined other nations. However, the additions from other nations to the
Osages probably kept pace with this population loss. Recorded casualties of
Osages killed in engagements with other Indian nations must be taken with
a generous grain of salt. In one instance, the Sac and Fox reported they had
killed over one hundred Osage warriors. However, in the same year, trad¬
ers reported that the Sac and Fox had killed only two Osages for the en¬
tire year.

Despite their extensive expansion and many battles in defense of their

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 243

Estimates of Osage Population

Year

Bands

Population |

1680

totals only

17,000

1815

totals only

12,000

1820

Claremore

5,000

1820

White Hair’s

Little Osage

2,083

Big Osage

3,333

1820

Little Osage

2.000

1830

totals only

10.000

1850

totals only

8,000

1860

totals only

3,500

Fig. 35. Notice the steady decline in population.

territory, the Osage population apparently remained stable until about 1800.
By 1815, the Osage population had probably dropped to around 12,000 to
14,000. Seemingly, it leveled off at 10,000 where it remained until the
1840s. At the beginning of the 1850s, the Osage population was probably
around 8,000. Individuals who were in a position to know, however, placed
the Osage population at 5,000 at the beginning of the 1850s. Yet, when one
totals the reported deaths from the epidemics and subtracts that from 5,000,
one gets much less than the reported 3,500 in i860. Therefore, we must
abide by our figure of 8,000 in 1850.

One of the most cited estimates is Major Sibleys in 1817. For example,
he places the warrior strength of the Claremore bands at 600. If we allow
five people per warrior, this would place the Claremore bands at 3,000. Yet,
less than five years later, a Protestant missionary placed the population of
Claremore’s village alone at 3,000. Thus, either Sibley erred in his estimate
or an Osage warrior supported more than five people.

We know from the written record that Black Dog’s band numbered be¬
tween five and six hundred in 1820. The Grosse Cote village was between
Black Dogs and Claremores in size, so we will count it as 1,000 people. We
have no idea how many small villages clustered about these larger villages,
but we believe a total estimate of five hundred persons is not unreasonably
large. Thus, the Arkansas bands must have totaled around 5,000 Osages. This
figures to be eight and one-third persons supported by each warrior. This
seems to be an unreasonable number to be supported by one warrior, so we
are inclined to believe that Sibleys report reflects the usual underestimation
of Indian populations. However, we will apply the warrior/population ratio
derived from Sibleys estimate and written accounts to the rest of Sibleys
estimate.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

244 / Pestilence Strikes the People

If we take Sibley’s estimate of two hundred fifty Little Osage warriors
and multiply by eight and one-third, we get 2,083 Little Osages. Following
the same process with the estimated four hundred White Hair Big Osages,
gives a population of 3,333 White Hair Big Osages. This yields a total
Osage population of 10,416 between 1817 and 1820. Sibley omitted the
three independent Little Osage bands, which would have numbered at least
as many as the White Hair Little Osages. This would place the population
near to 12,500 between 1817 and 1820, as a very modest estimate.

We have labored our way through these mental gymnastics to show how
we arrived at our population estimates. Another bit of information gives us
a clue to Osage population from the Osage viewpoint. Thomas Nuttall
notes that “Scarcely any nation of Indians have encountered more enemies
than the Osages; still they flatter themselves, by saying, that they are seated
in the middle of the world, and, although surrounded by so many enemies,
they have maintained their usual population, and their country.” 25

To 1820 and perhaps a few years beyond, the Osages were largely correct
in saying they had maintained their population. Yet, there had been a slow
attrition upon the Osage population that went unnoticed. This condition
prevailed up to 1850. That is, the Osages were saying they were maintaining
their population but in fact, by slow attrition, they were losing population.

In 1839, Tixier made the following comment about the attrition upon
the Osage population: “The Osage, who were formerly considered among
the most powerful nations, have lost much of their numerical importance;
internal quarrels, wars, epidemics, and smallpox in particular have decreased
their numbers considerably.” 26 It is impossible to accurately pinpoint the
cause of the slow attrition in Osage population. Epidemics and wars are
major causes, but these alone could not account for the steady and almost
constant decline in population up to 1850. We would be inclined to include
Tixier’s “internal quarrels” as a major reason for the decline instead of epi¬
demics and war, at least to 1850.

The internal quarrels would, and did, cause an unstable society. Such so¬
cieties often experience a decline in birthrate. Sociologists have never found
a satisfactory reason for the phenomenon. However, its existence is real, and
it seems to have been at work among the Osages. Another possibility is that
changes in diet, clothing, and especially cookware could have caused a de¬
cline. We know in the earlier periods cookware was made of copper and
brass. It is possible that the copper caused a few to die each year. However,
this would not account for a prolonged decline, because the Osages switched
to cast-iron cookware as soon as the effect of brass and copper was detected.

Another effect of internal strife is the growth of population through
voluntary realignment of loyalties. A society experiencing internal strife

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Pestilence Strikes the People / 245

is not attractive to those who would immigrate to a stable society. The
Osage myths clearly show that much of the Osage population growth
came through merging with other peoples and through adoption. By 1800,
the Missourias, the last group to do so, had merged with the Little Osages.
At this same time, the number of Pawnee captives available for adoption
was severely curtailed.

Apparently, a declining birthrate and a decline in immigrants were the
major factors in the reduction of Osage population between 1800 and 1850.
Earlier in this chapter we traced the disaster of the 1850s. While epidemics,
war, and famine were the major causes of population decline between 1850
and 1880, the birthrate and immigration causes still persisted. We have, then,
a nagging continual decline of population and dramatic, abrupt changes in
population.

While pestilence and death never left the Osages, by i860 they were
moving more gently among them. As the pale horse and his rider became
gentler with the Osages, the red horse and his rider rode among them. War
swung his great sword to the left and right, and Osages melted away before
the red charger. Thus, the Osages came face-to-face with the second horse¬
man, war, riding his red horse.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The White Man’s War Visits the Osages

INTRODUCTION

And there went out another horse that was red. And to him that sat
thereon, it was given that he should take peace from the earth: and that
they should kill one another. And a great sword was given to him.

The Wakarusa (Wah kuh’ roo suh) River is a tributary of the Kansas or
Kaw River. It enters the Kaw from the south, slightly east of Lawrence,
Kansas. Specifically, the term Wakarusa War is applied to the opening part
of the conflict in Kansas arising from the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska
Act. 1 As a matter of fact, to be accurate, we should apply this name to only
the first two weeks of this conflict. However, we may sometimes use Waka¬
rusa War interchangeably with “The War in Kansas” and “The Border War.”

Reforms

The reform movement in the United States began in the 1820s and contin¬
ued into the 1860s, but its crest was reached in the mid-i840s. Among the
issues brought forth were womens rights, human rights, prohibition, the
abolition of wars, ideal communities, and educational reforms. However, we
are especially interested in the abolition of slavery, Indian reforms, and the
Gospel of Individualism, all of which lay behind many reforms.

Although Indians were involved in all these issues of reform, their influ¬
ence was most evident in the creation of ideal communities, educational
reform, and the Gospel of Individualism. Finding humans living in a state
of natural freedom and possessing individual choice stimulated the minds
of Western civilization. Such stimulation led to the creation of many kinds

The epigraph is from “The Apocalypse of St.John the Apostle” 6:1-8, Douay version.
The red horse represented bloodshed and its rider represented war.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 247

of ideal communities that sought to fit Indian practices into the industrial,
religious, or political institutions of Western culture. Oneida Community,
which produced silverware under the Indian communal organization, was
one such adaptation.

The obvious need to educate the Indians in order to incorporate them
into the Euro-American culture—as most reformers wanted—led to a seri¬
ous look at education in general. In an earlier period Benjamin Franklin
had quoted an Indian chiefs views of Western education:

We are convinc’d, therefore, that you mean to do us good by your
proposal; and we thank you heartily. But you, who are wise, must
know that different nations have different conceptions of things; and
you will therefore, not take it amiss, if our ideas of this kind of edu¬
cation happen not to be the same with yours. We have had some ex¬
perience of it; several of our young people were formerly brought up
at the colleges of the Northern Provinces; they were instructed in all
your sciences; but when they came back to us they were bad runners,
ignorant of every means of living in the woods, unable to bear either
cold or hunger, knew neither how to build a cabin, take a deer, or kill
an enemy, spoke our language imperfectly, were totally good for noth¬
ing. We are however, not the less oblig’d by your kind offer, tho’ we
decline accepting it; and, to show our grateful sense of it, if the gentle¬
men of Virginia will send us a dozen of their sons, we will take great
care of their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men
of them. 2

Franklin used this quote to make the point that education should be rele¬
vant to the society in which it exists.

Both Franklin and Thomas Jefferson argued that an education which
stressed only the Liberal Arts was not relevant in the American society. Be¬
cause of Jefferson’s views, William and Mary stressed the practical and Ap¬
plied Arts and Sciences as well as physical development and the Liberal Arts.
Franklin’s ideas were taken up by Eliphilet Knott at Union College in
Pennsylvania and required every Union graduate to have both a classical
education and a practical education. Thus, every Union graduate had a prac¬
tical skill in some trade. George Tinker, who later married into the Osage
nation, was a graduate of Union and worked as a blacksmith, although he
was also trained in the professions.

It was in this era that Horace Mann revolutionized American education
in Massachusetts. There, for the first time, compulsory free education was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

248 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

enacted into law. Universal literacy became an educational goal of America.
It is sad that Indian education in the BIA schools was not patterned on
Indian ideas of relevancy instead of those adopted by Western civilization.

While the Gospel of Individualism was applied to business and industry,
it reached its greatest heights in literature. This came with the natural rights
philosophy and the rise of nationalism in the United States. Natural rights
philosophy and the rise of American nationalism are an outgrowth of In¬
dian culture, both in origin and impetus. Three outstanding writers made
individualism an American credo. These writers were Henry David Thoreau,
Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Walt Whitman.

The slavery issue became an enormous emotional matter because of the
reform movement. All programs and efforts to eliminate slavery by a grad¬
ual emancipation were lost in the heat of the abolition movement, which
demanded the immediate emancipation of all slaves. Also lost in the rising
tide of emotion was the conflict between an agrarian economic base and a
rising industrial-commercial economic base. Politically, the States’ Rights
question was also overlooked. In fact, all issues, including the Indian ques¬
tion, were shoved into the background as the emotional tide of abolition
swept over the American nation.

The Gathering Storm

The slavery issue colored every matter that came before Congress. As emo¬
tions became increasingly aroused, Congress became a battleground. With
the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, a railroad to the Pacific
grew from a remote dream into a possibility. Both the Northeast and the
South wanted the transcontinental railroad, which now appeared to be pos¬
sible. The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 gave the South a feasible path by fol¬
lowing the old Butterfield Route (Ox-Bow Route) to California. Not only
did this route have forts along the way for protection, but it also passed
through organized territory.

This organized territory argument was seized by the Northeastern rail¬
road men, who demanded that Nebraska Territory be organized. Therefore,
the Kansas-Nebraska Bill was introduced into Congress. This Bill proposed
to divide Nebraska Territory into two territories. Kansas Territory was the
southern part and Nebraska Territory became the northern part (see Fig. 36).
A provision to let the people of the territory decide whether they were to
be admitted as a slave or free-soil territory provoked a storm.

The proviso of “popular sovereignty” was added to gain Southern sup¬
port for the bill, which was needed for passage because the bill primarily
dealt with the interests of the Northeastern railroad. Yet, Northeastern con¬
gressmen fumed and argued that in allowing the possibility of slavery in

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

250 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

Kansas the bill violated the Missouri Compromise. At the outset Kansas was
expected to become a slave state and Nebraska a free-soil state. Despite ob¬
jections, the bill passed in 1854, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act became the
law of the land.

Stephen A. Douglas wanted a northern transcontinental railroad with its
eastern terminus at Chicago, where he had investments. He also hoped to
take the slavery controversy out of Congress. As expected, he failed in this
last objective, although he did bring the argument to Kansas Territory.

Prairie Storm

The immediate effect of the Kansas-Nebraska Act upon the Osages was a
surge of intruders from Missouri who settled upon Osage lands. These first
intruders, for the most part, were temporary, although later intruders tended
to be permanent. They gathered for the first territorial election in Novem¬
ber of 1854. Because of Missourians who became “Kansans for a day” and
voted in this election, the election results were voided. A census was con¬
ducted in 1855, and a second territorial election was held in March of 1855.
Over five thousand Missourians voted in this second election, and the Osages
were deluged with intruders. These two elections and a re-vote in six of the
districts still left the question of slavery in Kansas pending.

Violence first broke out on the Wakarusa, south of Lawrence, Kansas,
when a free-soiler was killed. A pro-slavery party of 1,500 marched to the
free-soil stronghold of Lawrence. Little came of this since the “army” did
not take Lawrence. Kansas rapidly became an armed camp. Free-soil and
pro-slavery “armies” were formed. These “armies” became little more than
raiding parties who used the slavery issue to raid the Osages and other In¬
dians, as well as those who opposed their pro-slavery stance.

At this point, John Brown decided to kill some pro-slavery men. With
Brown on the loose at the northern side of the Osage Reserve, intruders
who were armed to the teeth became common on Osage lands. To curb
some of the violence, the United States government sent dragoons to Kan¬
sas. These were mounted troops who normally rode to battle but then dis¬
mounted and fought as infantry in combat. This same type of fighting was
used by the Kansas “armies,” such as Jim Montgomerys.

Montgomery roamed all over Southeast Kansas. He was active in Bour¬
bon and Dorn (Neosho-Labette) counties. The Osages had reason to know
him well because of his frequent forays into their territory. Montgomery has
the distinction of being the only “border army” to fire upon federal troops,
an engagement in which Montgomery killed one trooper and wounded
two others. One of own his own men,John Denton, was wounded and later
died from the wound. 3

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 251

A situation developed much closer to the Osages in July of 1861. Besides
the horde of illegal Euro-American settlers on the Osage Reserve, there
were traders and government employees, as well as the Jesuits and Sisters of
Osage Mission (see Fig. 37). These, like other Euro-Americans of this time,
took positive positions for or against slavery in Kansas. Samuel Gilmore,
who had a store near Osage Mission, was an outspoken free-soiler. Father
Schonmakers seldom involved himself in political questions, but he was
firmly against the institution of slavery and advised the Osages to remain
neutral.

John Mathews was a trader at Oswego, Kansas, downstream from the Mis¬
sion. He was a slaveholder and was ardently a pro-slavery adherent. Mathews
was married to both half-blood daughters of Bill Williams, the Mountain
Man. Another player in this drama was the stepson of Mathews, who was at
various times called Bill Nix, Bill Nixon, Bill Mathes, or Red Corn. 4 Red
Corn had attended the Jesuit schools at Florissant, Missouri, and at Osage
Mission. He later became a Baptist Minister, but in the summer of 1861 he
was a sincere Catholic and devoted to Fr. Schonmakers.

John Mathews had gathered a force of pro-slavery people who were de¬
termined to silence both Gilmore and Fr. Schonmakers. They left in a heavy
rainstorm to carry out their purpose. Red Corn had started earlier and had
crossed the Neosho before it had reached the flood stage. The “army” col¬
lected by Mathews had to wait for the water to subside. Meanwhile, Red
Corn warned Fr. Schonmakers of the pending attack. Leaving the mission
in the care of Fr. Ponziglione, Fr. Schonmakers and Gilmore fled to Hum¬
boldt, Kansas. After a brief rest at Humboldt, Fr. Schonmakers went on to
St. Mary’s Mission to the Potawatomi. Fr. Schonmakers stayed at St. Mary’s
Mission for eight months.

Injustice to Mathews it should be mentioned that when his group reached
the mission he made sure that neither the Sisters, the Mission, nor anyone in
it was harmed. Hoping to capture Gilmore at Humboldt, Mathews took the
town and then plundered and looted it. Horrified by this act, the free-soilers
tracked Mathews down and killed him at Chetopa, Kansas. Thus, the free-
soilers committed some of the same acts as Mathews. Neither side could
claim to be free of similar or even worse acts of violence.

Such incidents as created by Montgomery and Mathews, and many others
like them, greatly disturbed the Osages. Due to their location, their villages
were to be vulnerable in the years ahead to invasion and looting. Thus, a high
proportion of warriors had to remain in the villages to protect the women,
children, and aged. This reduced the hunting force and, consequently, the
meat supply. Others have noted the strategic location of the Osages, among
them Sister Fitzgerald, who mentions the location factor in her great work,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Fig. 37. Notice the heavy settlement along the Kansas River.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 253

Beacon on the Plain: “Geographically, the Osage were so located that they
could swing the balance of the western campaigns either in favor of the
Union or the Confederacy.” 5

Their location made the ordeal of the Osages very severe between 1855
and 1865. There was no escape from the inroads made upon their lands by
the contending forces. In a very real sense, the Osages paid a terrible price
for the freedom of blacks.

THE CIVIL WAR

Euro-American Views of the Indian

Views held by Euro-Americans toward the Indian during the Civil War era
greatly affected the sequence of Indian events. While this applied to some
Indians in a general way, it applied very directly to the Osages. So we must
examine these views.

It seems strange that those people who were willing to give their lives
in opposition to slavery could be so racially biased. Yet, those who most
ardently opposed slavery were as racially biased as those who defended slav¬
ery. The institution of slavery itself became the issue and not the question
of racial equality.

Bias toward blacks was only slightly greater than the bias of most Euro-
Americans toward the Indians. Ellsworth Huntington is considered to be
the greatest geographer of the twentieth century. His cyclic theory of cli¬
mates is a great contribution to scholarship. Yet, this great scholar, who was
a product of the Civil War era, was terribly biased toward the Indian. His
bias is summed up in his own words: “As to the Indian, his past achieve¬
ments and present condition indicate that intellectually he stands between
the white man and the Negro in about the position that would be expected
from the capacity of his brain.” 6

We would not want to be guilty of counter bias, but Osage school chil¬
dren score slightly higher on intelligence tests than their non-Osage class¬
mates. 7 This objective evidence strongly suggests that Huntington was in
error because of both his bias and a faulty skull theory.

Euro-Americans clung tenaciously to the belief that Indians were sav¬
ages. Since a savage could not be like a white man, who was civilized, In¬
dians, being savages, were inferior to the white men. Therefore, it was the
responsibility of the Euro-American to decide who and what was a savage. 8
The Euro-Americans used this circular reasoning to justify in their own
minds their unethical behavior toward the Indians.

It was popular to point to the degradation of the Indian in order to sup¬
port the belief of inferiority. No consideration was given to the fact that

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

254 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

this inferior position was the result of Euro-American policies and not a
fault of the Indians themselves. Surely, the American Indian fared better
without the Euro-Americans than with them. In the light of observable
facts, no one could consider the coming of Euro-Americans to this conti¬
nent as a blessing for Indians.

The only distinction between Euro-American reformers and the majority
was in their intentions. Reformers always meant well; their desire was to aid
in a humanitarian crisis. Yet, most Euro-Americans were motivated by en¬
lightened self-interest. Unfortunately for the Indian, the majority wanted
what the Indian had, and the reformers unwittingly furnished the means to
get it.

One must remember that reformers were products of their own culture,
as is evident from their efforts to bleach the Indian and make him like them¬
selves. The re-creation of the Indian in the Euro-American image was al¬
most universal in the American culture. Statements such as the following
were frequently made by both the reformer and non-reformer: “His whole
nature must be changed. He must have a white man’s ambition, to be like
him. He must have the objects and aims of a white man.” 9

Euro-Americans of the Civil War Era could not see any value in the
Indian culture. They could not recognize greed for material things as an evil
because, in their minds, material greed was identified as ambition. The In¬
dian’s lack of greed for material objects led Euro-Americans to believe In¬
dians had no ambition.

An image of the Indian as a lazy idler became popular in the Civil War
era. Almost without exception, earlier accounts had pictured the hard lot of
Indian women and the easy life of Indian men. While this was far from true,
it was taken as truth by the culture that produced the accounts. From this
evolved the belief that Indians, and especially the men, were lazy.

A vast difference exists between hunting for food and hunting as a sport.
The labor involved in hunts to establish a meat supply is staggering. Secur¬
ing a meat supply from a domestic herd is much easier than securing it from
the hunt. That is why herding was established in the Old World. Lacking
meat animals that could be domesticated was a great handicap to Indians,
causing them to have to hunt for their meat supply. Thus, they had less lei¬
sure time to pursue higher needs. Euro-Americans were not hunters in the
sense of securing the total meat supply from the hunt. Thus, they had no
appreciation for the labor involved in such activities. They tended to view
the hunt as a sport and, therefore, considered it to be a leisure-time activity.

Few Euro-Americans met situations where their lives depended on their
ability to run for prolonged periods. Osage men and women often walked
seventy to eighty miles in a day. Under emergency conditions, Osage men

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 255

more than doubled this. Osage men often were required to run so hard and
so long that they coughed up blood from their strained lungs. Few Euro-
Americans ever worked this hard. Indian men rested when they were in
their villages, a fact that gave Euro-American observers the impression that
all the men did was loaf around and enjoy the sport of hunting or making
war.

Facts have much less to do with human actions than beliefs. Thus, the
faith in labor and the belief that Indians were idlers found reflection in
Euro-American deeds and words. David Nichols argues, “Labor is a great
civilizer. I do not believe that the efforts to civilize or convert to Christi¬
anity an idle race of Barbarians will ever succeed unless you first induce
them to become industrious, prudent and thrifty.” 10

When one speaks of thrift the Melanesian tribesmen of the island of Efate
in the South Pacific come to mind. These people would take castaway bot¬
tles and make diving goggles and many other products from them. Ameri¬
can Indians also utilized things the “thrifty” Euro-Americans cast away.

Modern man has no concept of industry, prudence, and thrift until he has
objectively observed primitive people. Either the Indian was so highly civ¬
ilized that he had lost his prudence, industry, and thrift or the writer of the
above quote was not correct. The Indian was certainly not as advanced in
technology as Western civilization, but it is definitely untrue that Indian
culture was inferior in other respects.

If the American Indian had not been hard working, prudent, industrious,
and thrifty, he would not have survived the affliction of Western civiliza¬
tion. Western history records no such calamity striking their culture, so ac¬
curate comparisons cannot be made. When the experience of the American
Indian is compared to what happened after the fall of Rome, the question
of which culture recovered and adapted to the change in a shorter span of
time arises.

Manifest Destiny

Farming evolved into the ideal of the American Utopia in the first half of
the 1800s. This trend of glorifying the farming occupation continued into
the twentieth century. Both the South and the West were heavily agrarian.
Before i860, the Northeast was a mixture of agricultural, commercial, and
a growing industrial economic base. Because of the Civil War, the industrial
base was greatly accelerated. Yet, even the industrial worker dreamed of
someday being an independent farmer. By 1900, America had the largest
group of middle-class farmers in history.

From this background, it was natural for reformers to suggest farming as
a solution to the Indian problem. Thus, the concept of individual allotment

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

256 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

was introduced into Indian affairs. Intentions were that the individual In¬
dian would take pride in owning and tilling a piece of land of his own.
Without any background of individual land ownership, the Indian was at a
loss to determine what to do with the land. Land speculators and individuals
seeking farms quickly taught the Indian to sell his allotment.

Indian policy makers who were determined to make farmers of Indians
could not see that this was in direct conflict with “manifest destiny.” Their
intentions were to enable the Indian to survive as full members of the ma¬
jority culture. The Indian people had no desire to become members of the
Euro-American culture and the unwashed frontier settlers did not want
them as neighbors.

Manifest destiny was a strange quasi-religious belief that the United
States was destined to occupy all of North America. While this is related to
the Protestant beliefs in predestination and predeterminism, many Catholic
Americans and others who believed in free will also shared the belief in
manifest destiny. Most Euro-Americans believed God had ordained that
they would achieve the occupation of the entire North American Conti¬
nent. Against this groundswell of belief, Indians had little opportunity to
become successful farmers, even if they had ardently desired to do so. The
Indian would have lost his land regardless of what policy was followed. This
is assuming the government would continue to ignore its obligation to en¬
force treaty provisions.

This brings out a key problem in Indian affairs. No matter how well
conceived a policy was, in the final appraisal it depended on the enforce¬
ment of treaty provisions. The provisions most frequently neglected were
those of guaranteed reservation and prohibition of intruders. At the close of
the Civil War, the United States had the largest, most experienced, modern
military force in the world. Yet, it could not or would not, and surely did
not, keep intruders out of Indian reservations. Nor did the government
stand behind the guaranteed reservation as provided in treaty agreements.
“As long as the grass grows and the water flows” has become a symbol of
bad faith in a contract.

Manifest destiny led many Euro-Americans to predict the extinction of
the Indian—a natural conclusion, given an understanding of manifest des¬
tiny. Yet, the Indians had descended from survivors of great disasters. As has
been indicated in the preceding paragraphs, the settlers, being driven by
manifest destiny, wanted the only valuable thing the Indian owned. The life
of the Indian is not what was desired. Indian lives were taken when they
stood in the “path of empire,” but so long as the Indian stood aside, he
survived.

A remarkable statement by Abraham Lincoln reveals his ethnic blindness:

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 257

“The pale-faced people are numerous and prosperous because they cultivate
the earth, produce bread, and depend upon the products of the earth rather
than wild game for subsistence. This is the chief reason of the difference; but
there is another. Although we are now engaged in a great war between one
another, we are not as a race, so much disposed to fight and kill one another
as our red brethren.” 11 This statement shows Lincoln’s total ignorance about
the Indian. We suspect what is true of the Osage is basically true of other
Indians.

A comparison of Osage myths and legends with Western myths and leg¬
ends shows a sharp contrast. In Osage literature, war and combat is rarely
mentioned, and atonement is included in the killing of an animal or a hu¬
man. By contrast, Western literature glorifies war, combat, and violence. To
be sure, the American Civil War was an exceptionally bloody war. Yet one
cannot help noticing that more has been written about this war than any
other event in the history of the United States or the world.

How then could Lincoln accuse Indians of being more prone to kill their
fellow men than the peoples of Western civilization? We believe the nature
of two kinds of wars are involved. First, we are assuming warfare is a form
of insanity which afflicts humanity. Basically, it is not a sane act to deliber¬
ately take a life, especially when one risks one’s own life in the process.
Among the Osage, life was spared if possible, except on rare occasions. It is
true that lives were taken in the frequent wars of the Osages. The difference
is that few lives were taken in many Indian wars while many lives were
taken in fewer Western wars. It is much like comparing the two World Wars
with the many post-World War II “Cold Wars” and the large number of
“Brush Fire Wars.”

This distinction of many wars versus few wars led Euro-Americans to
believe Indians were more blood-thirsty than themselves. Yet, if one totaled
the percent of deaths per combatant over a score of years, Western civiliza¬
tion would show a greater percent of loss. Lincoln could not have fore¬
seen the great industrial-commercial revolution that followed the Civil War.
Nor could he have foreseen the staggering population growth of the “pale-
faced people.” Even if he could have foreseen these facts, and the consequent
contamination of the earth, he probably would still have argued that West¬
ern civilization was superior to the Indian civilization.

Every civilization carries the seed for its own destruction. In Western
civilization, the seed of destruction lies in the race between advancing
technology and population growth. It is customary to soothe alarm by ob¬
serving that science will solve all problems. The faith in science and the
technology it produces has replaced manifest destiny. Yet, more and more the
contamination of the earth and the atmosphere and the depletion of re-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

258 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

sources are telling us that the race is nearing the finish line. In some ways,
Western civilization stands where the Osage people stood in 1850, and it
must face a basic law of survival—adapt your culture to reality or perish.

Lincolns program for the West revolved around three things. These were
the Homestead Act of 1862, the development of mineral resources, and the
construction of a transcontinental railroad. 12 As one might suspect, the
Homestead Act accelerated the demand for Indian lands. In their search for
minerals, especially gold, Euro-Americans and the government ignored their
own laws of Indian rights. Thus railroads, because of the land grant prac¬
tices, were financed by Indians. These matters will be taken up in later
chapters, but their roots were in the Civil War era.

Indian Influence in the Civil War

Lincoln found the Office of Indian Affairs to be a powerful bureaucracy
with both political and economic aspects. 12 The money involved in Indian
affairs was vast for Lincoln’s time, although the amount would not seem so
great today. Treaty annuities alone were enough to attract individuals who
sought riches above all else. Yet, the greatest source of Indian monies came
from the sale of their lands.

In each of these categories—treaty annuities and Indian land sales mo¬
nies—special means were used to siphon off funds. Insofar as treaty annui¬
ties were concerned, the most common device was to provide the Indian
with a product or service that was neither desired by him nor would give
him little more than a token benefit. With the millions of dollars accumu¬
lated from Indian land sales, it was profitable to invest the money at a high
interest rate and pay the Indian a low interest rate. Variations in the invest¬
ment of Indian funds were so abundant that one must be impressed by the
white man’s ingenuity. Possibly, the investment in railroad bonds was the
most ingenious. Indians not only furnished thousands of acres of land to
the land grant railroads, at less than bargain basement prices, but they also
loaned the funds necessary for railroad construction. Thus, the Indian was
made to finance his own destruction.

We have not investigated very deeply the use of Indian funds to finance
the Civil War. However, a surface exploration suggests that Indians may
have, to a sizable degree, financed emancipation of blacks. Surely, the Osages
financed the establishment of at least one Negro college. 14

With the large sums being managed by the Indian Affairs Bureau, it is
not surprising that positions within the bureau were political plums. Since
these were the choice positions of political patronage, the Bureau of Indian
Affairs became politically powerful. Its personnel were among the most in¬
fluential political party members. Thus, they had considerable political clout.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 259

More often than not this placed people with little interest in Indian welfare
in charge of Indian affairs. Hence, the Union was badly disorganized and
unprepared to utilize Indians in the Civil War. So, the Confederacy was first
to gain the support of Indians.

One of the most vexing problems was the matter of claims. This was a
one-way road in favor of the whites, since their claims were assumed to be
valid as long as annuities were available to pay the claim. Yet there was no
procedure available for an Indian to file a claim against a white person. It
was politically expedient to approve the claim of a voter, but Indians did
not have a vote. Some claims were so blatantly false, however, that even the
BIA would not approve them. In these rare cases, a friendly congressman
could easily be persuaded to introduce a private bill, and the claim would
be paid. Here again, through bribes and election support using Indian money,
the Indian financed the reelection of congressmen who were destroying
them—in much the same way as the railroad financing was destroying the
Indian nations.

For those involved in these various practices, there was an added bonus—
it was perfectly legal. Only when someone dipped directly into the funds
was there a public cry of corruption. Claims, loans, or sales of useless ser¬
vices and products were all legal forms of graft. In essence, as long as the
graft affected only Indians, it was legal. It was upon this background that
Lincoln took into consideration the role of Indians in the Civil War.

Indians were not so naive that they were unaware of some graft. The
frustrating thing was that they did not have the means to defend themselves
or to retaliate. One old Indian summed up the whole mess very graphi¬
cally: “Dam rascal plenty here. He steal him horse. He steal him timber. He
steal him everything. He make him good business. Many agents come here.
Sometimes good. Sometimes bad. Most bad. The agent say, you must not do
so. The next one come, he say you do very foolish. The Government not
want you to do so. Agent much dam rascal. Indian much dam fool.” 15

The Osages and the Civil War
The Union

Lincoln and the Union were slow to recognize the potential of the Osages
in the war and slower still in using Osage forces. The North was very much
opposed to using Indians as soldiers, although their use as scouts and inter¬
preters was accepted. Although some four hundred Osages did serve as sol¬
diers in the Union Army, the actual issue of Osages serving as soldiers was
not settled until World War I. 16

Possibly, Lincoln was aware that the Union was vulnerable to a Southern
Indian attack through Kansas. If Southeastern Kansas could have been oc-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

260 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

cupied by Confederate Indian forces, it is possible that Missouri might have
joined with the South. Aside from the course pursued by Missouri, it would
have required diversion of needed troops to keep the land connection with
the Far West intact. In essence, this was the service rendered to the Union
by the Osages. They acted as buffer troops to prevent Stand Watie’s forces
from occupying Southeast Kansas. Osages not in the military acted as a
homeguard to prevent surprise actions by the Confederacy.

Thus, in the service of the Union, the Osages were subjected to the see¬
saw actions in Southeast Kansas. Their villages stood between the Union
forts to the north and the Confederate strongholds to the south. Being in
such a position, their villages would be invaded by first one side and then
the other, and at times their villages were the site of battles between the two
factions. Naturally, any useful supplies or horses belonging to the Osages
were seized by the invading forces of both sides.

Sister Fitzgerald summed up this type of action in Beacon on the Plain:
“Passing troops never failed to leave their mark on the Indian country. With
something akin to diabolic ruthlessness they plundered Indian cottages, de¬
stroyed fields and set fire to schools and churches .” 17 With so many of their
young men in the service of both sides and with hunting parties seeking
food, the village force was not always large enough to repel these larger
invasion forces. With their food reserves stolen, crops destroyed, and a re¬
stricted supply of meat, the Osages suffered almost constant famine.

The Confederacy

Following the advice of Fr. Schonmakers, the Osage, like other nations,
tried to remain neutral. The Lincoln administration abandoned the Indians
in the West. In desperation many joined with the Confederacy. The South
was actively seeking Indian support. A.J. Dorn, the Indians’ former United
States Agent, was now working with Albert Pike, the Confederate Indian
Commissioner. To a great extent, his influence upon the Osages canceled
out the influence of Fr. Schonmakers. However, by August 20 , 1864 , Dorn
had left the Osages ample room to do as they pleased. In a report to S. B.
Maxey, who was then acting as Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the
Confederacy, R. W Lee, the Assistant Superintendent, addressed a problem
with the Osage Agent A.J. Dorn: “The Agent for the Osages resides at Bon¬
ham, Texas, recent difficulties at the Osage camp might have been prevented
by the presence of the Agent, and if it were not already obvious, this occur¬
rence would serve to demonstrate the propriety of the law, requiring Agents
to reside with or near the people of their charge .” 18

We could not determine the nature of this difficulty in the Osage camp.
Since the two hundred forty-one Confederate Osages were camped on the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 261

left side of the Arkansas River west of present-day Tulsa, they were near the
cutting edge of the fighting. Dorn was wise in setting his residence in Texas;
it is also probable that he was not being paid.

In any event, early in the conflict, Dorn was busy among the Osages.
Dorn and Augustus “Ogeese” Captain took advantage of Fr. Schonmakers’s
eight month exile from Osage Mission and persuaded them to attend a gen¬
eral council at Tahlequah, Oklahoma. The Cherokee leader, John Ross, was
greatly respected by the Osage leadership, and they were led to believe that
the great Cherokee chief supported the Confederacy. This was not true,
since John Ross led the neutral Cherokees and Stand Watie led the Confed¬
erate Cherokee.

Confederate Treaty

Albert Pike, the Confederate Commissioner, chaired the council and man¬
aged to persuade the Big Osages to sign a treaty with the Confederacy at
nearby Park Hill. The Little Osages led by Little Bear and Hard Rope re¬
fused to sign the treaty. Among those who “touched the feather” were: Big
Chief; White Hair; Sacred Sky; Black Dog II; Little Beaver, who was leader
of the White Hair Little Osages; Tallchief; Dry Plume; Saucy Chief; Little
Chief; Yellow Horse; Horse Chief; Guesso Chouteau; Ogeese Captain; Louis
J. Chouteau; and many others. 19 The treaty is very long, with a total of
forty-five Articles. We will not attempt to discuss the entire treaty, but we
will touch upon some Articles.

Article III gives the usual assurances of friendship and territorial guar¬
antees. To our knowledge, the Treaty of 1861 is the only Osage Treaty to use
the phrase, “as long as grass shall grow and water shall run.”

Article VIII is of special interest because it shows a different trend in
Indian affairs. In this Article, the Confederacy promises that no part of the
Osage territory will ever become a part of any state or territory nor will
any state or territory ever exercise sovereignty over them. This indicates that
the Confederacy intended to create either a series of semi-independent na¬
tions or a special Indian state.

Article IX gives assurances of hunting rights west of the five nations’
possessions. While this is an affirmation of what was then an existing right,
it does show the Osages had some claim to lands in Oklahoma. However,
the United States, although granting hunting rights, retained complete title
of ownership. The Confederacy did not insert a clause of ownership.

Article XVI required the Osage Agent and interpreter to reside among
the Osages. As we mentioned earlier, Major Dorn was in violation of this
agreement since he resided in Texas.

Article XVII forbad the Osages to go on the warpath without the con-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

262 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

sent of the Agent. An exception to this is made in the case of an invasion
by a hostile force. Significantly, the Osages were forbidden to hold a council
without the Agent’s permission. This was especially mentioned in connec¬
tion with those at war with the Confederacy. Although this was an effort to
solve a serious problem, there is no way it could have been enforced.

Article XXIV shows the effect of Dorn’s experience with epidemics
among the Osages: “The Confederate States will also furnish, at proper
places, the Great and Little Osages with such medicines as may be necessary,
and will employ a physician for each, who shall reside among them, during
the pleasure of the President.’’ 2 "

Article XXVI is possibly the most unusual provision of any treaty in
Osage history. We are not aware of any other document in Osage history,
other than some features of the marriage laws, where the Euro-American
government accepts as legal an existing Osage law. So, although it is lengthy,
we will quote it in its entirety: “No State or Territory shall ever pass laws
for the government of the Osage people; and except so far as the laws of the
Confederate States are in force in their country, they shall be left free to
govern themselves, and to punish offences committed by one of themselves
against the person or property of another: PROVIDED, that if one of them
kills another, without good cause or justification, he shall suffer death, but only by
the sentence of the Chiefs, and after a fair trial, all private revenge being strictly
forbidden .” 21

The portion in italics is an excellent statement of a basic Osage law. With
the exceptions that (i) payment must be offered in atonement for the act in
lieu of execution, and (2) the Division Chief of the offender made the rul¬
ing and the Ah ke ta conducted the execution, if any. In Osage law, the death
sentence was imposed only after all other avenues of atonement had been
exhausted.

Article XXVII is of special interest because of its effect on a later law.
Article IX of laws made under the Osage Constitution of 1881 provides
that a Euro-American married to an Osage could become an Osage citizen
by residing on the reservation and taking an oath of allegiance to the Osage
nation. 22 This same idea first appears in the Confederate-Osage Treaty of
1851 in Article XXVII.

Article XXXII is interesting because it recognizes and condones an an¬
cient Osage practice. Under this provision, persons of other Indian nations
were allowed to settle among the Osages. This article was probably to legal¬
ize the Quapaw who resided with the Osages.

Article XXXIII allows free passage through Osage territory. It is espe¬
cially interesting that the right to hunt while passing through Osage terri¬
tory is not mentioned, but the right to graze livestock in passage is men-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 263

tioned. In a way, this provision is foretelling what is to come. That is, the
passing of the hunt and the coming of the “long drive” and ranching.

It is worth noting that the Lincoln administration made no effort to
either prevent this treaty from being made or to seek a treaty canceling out
the Confederate treaty. This fact tends to verify the abandonment of the
Osages by the Lincoln administration. Yet, when the Lincoln administration
reversed their neglect, they found the Osages willing to support the federal
government.

While the Osages furnished at least four hundred men to the Union
forces, the Little Osages who were not in the military made the greatest
single contribution to the Union. Since this is a long story, we will present
it under its own heading. It should be mentioned here, however, that for
every Osage who supported the Confederacy there were at least five who
supported the Union. Surely the Osages had abundant reason to dislike the
United States government. Yet, to the Osages, the United States govern¬
ment was a known factor and one favored by Fr. Schonmakers. The re¬
spected Cherokee leader, John Ross, like Fr. Schonmakers, urged neutrality.
Despite the choice made by individual Osages, the tribal bond overrode any
animosities toward each other. They tried to avoid fighting any units con¬
taining Osage members. When they met in combat they would break off
the contact.

Confederate Officers

On May 15, 1863, the Osages undoubtedly saved Kansas from a series of
devastating Indian attacks. By this time, all three of the independent Little
Osage bands had located their villages on the Verdigris drainage. The Clare-
more Big Hills were on Big Hill Creek downstream from Independence,
Kansas. All the Little Osage villages were north of Independence. Both the
Big Hills and Little Osage villages were on the east side of the Verdigris.
Hard Rope and eight or ten of his men had left the Big Hill village after a
visit. Their intention was to go to Osage Mission before returning to their
village.

They had crossed Drum Creek southeast of Independence when they
spotted a group of mounted white men. Approaching the party of about
twenty-two men, Hard Rope asked them to identify themselves. The men
replied that they were a detachment of Union irregulars stationed at Fort
Humboldt. Hard Rope told them he knew the men stationed at Humboldt,
and he did not see any familiar faces among their party.

The men ignored the request of the Osages to accompany them to Fort
Humboldt for identification. As they started to move away, the Osages tried
to restrain them. In the ensuing scuffle, one of the white men shot and

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

264 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

killed an Osage. Being outnumbered, Hard Rope withdrew his men and
sent a messenger to the nearby Big Hill village for help.

With the Big Hill reinforcements, the Osages struck the party of white
men about five miles from a loop in the Verdigris. There was a running fight
in which two white men and another Osage were killed. If the white men
had stayed in the open, they might have been able to hold the Osages back.
However, they made for the timber bordering the loop in the Verdigris. The
Osages used the timber on the flanks of the white men for shelter and ul¬
timately forced the white men out on a gravel bar. From the tree shelter, the
Osages fired upon the doomed men.

A total of twenty bodies of white men were found. Signs indicated that
two wounded men had escaped. All the heads were severed from the bodies,
the age-old treatment for those who intruded into Osage territory without
permission.

From the uniforms and recovered papers, it was determined that these
men had been Confederate officers. Their mission was to disperse among
the various northern Indian nations and to stir them into attacking northern
settlements. Thus, the Osages saved Kansas from a series of devastating In¬
dian raids. 23 Later in the war, five Osages tracked down and killed two
Confederate officers on the same kind of mission in Southeastern Colorado.

Maybe it is needless to say, but the Osages were greatly relieved to dis¬
cover they had not killed any Union people. They had been very careful not
to kill United States citizens and thus provoke a war with the United States.
This is not to say they never killed Americans—it is to point out that they
had never engaged in such wholesale slaughter of United States citizens at
one time. In the long run, it is probable that the Osages slew more Euro-
Americans than any other Indian nation. This was surely true in the pre-
American period and very probably true in the American period. Yet, to
most Americans, the Osages are not known as fighting Indians. In a way, this
is a tribute to the skill of the Little Old Men. They conducted warfare with¬
out arousing the United States to the point of using troops against the
Osages.

As we have already indicated, far more Osages followed the Union than
the Confederacy. An Osage battalion served under Stand Watie, yet far more
served in Colonel John Retchie’s Second Indian Regiment in Kansas. The
Osages were proud of this fact and did not hesitate to remind the “great
white father” of this service when the occasion required it.

Refugee Indians in Osage Territory

We must not assume the Osages were the only Indian nation divided by the
Civil War. With the admission of Kansas as a state in January of 1861, the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 265

last vestige of the Kansas portion of Indian Territory ceased to exist. 24 On
the whole, the Indians in Kansas remained loyal to the Union. The Osages
and the Indians in what remained of Indian Territory in Oklahoma were
almost all divided to varying degrees. This situation created a refugee In¬
dian problem in Kansas.

The Indians who wished to remain with the Union but lived in Indian
Territory were placed in a perilous position by Lincoln’s indecision. It is
understandable that Lincoln had met many serious decisions in a decisive
manner, but the problem of the Western Indians was characterized by inde¬
cision. Without a doubt, this was due to a lack of knowledge about Indian
Territory and Indians. Lincoln’s delays and reversals in Indian Affairs forced
many Indians, such as some Osages, to join with the Confederacy. It was this
indecision of Lincoln and positive action by the Confederacy that forced so
many Indian nations to split early in the Civil War.

We must clearly understand that a split within an Indian nation over the
slavery issue did not have the same effect as it did among Euro-Americans.
Generally, the mutual affection of the tribal bond and respect for each other
remained unchanged even though the Indian nation was divided by differ¬
ent views of the slavery issue. We are speaking of Indians who followed the
traditional life and not of mixed-bloods who did not follow the traditional
life. The dictum of “there can be no neutral ground in a Civil War” was
forced upon the Indian nations by external forces. In their relationships with
the Union and Confederacy, the Indian nations did not seek neutral ground,
but within their own tribal organization their position tended to be tolerant
and somewhat neutral toward each other.

The danger to the refugee Indians did not come from within their own
tribal system, but instead it came from the nontraditional members of their
own nation who followed the Confederacy and other Confederate Indians.
One must bear in mind that there could be no neutral ground among the
Indian nations. Tolerance was an internal matter that did not extend to ex¬
ternal matters. Thus, a northern sympathizer among southern Indians, other
than within his own tribal system, was “fair game.” The same thing was
true in the north. Yet the problem was greater in Oklahoma because of the
sheer number of splits or divisions involved.

As more and more pro-Union Indians moved into Kansas from Indian
Territory the people of Kansas demanded action. 23 Thus, the Lincoln ad¬
ministration was forced into making a decision to take Indian Territory.
Since this was easier said than done, it should not be surprising to discover
that the Union was unable to take more than a small part of Indian Terri¬
tory. Hence, thousands of Indian refugees sat out the Civil War by residing
in Kansas, mainly in Osage territory.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

266 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

Kansas Population Growth

Year

Population

% of Increase*

1854

600-700

1855

8,601

12.25

1860

107,206

12.50

1870

364,399

3.50

1880

996,096

2.50

| *These % figures are rounded off. ]\

Fig. 38. Notice the rapid growth between 1854 and i860.

These refugees were pawns in a political power play going on in Kansas.
The Creeks were in a drastic condition, but they only asked for assistance
to return to Indian Territory. In the two months they spent in Kansas, 240
of them died, and more than a hundred frozen limbs were amputated. 26 The
Wichitas were also in a desperate condition. They asked the Osages if they
could hunt and reside at the present site of Wichita, Kansas. The Osage con¬
sent enabled the Wichitas to survive the war, and they were not molested
by the Osages. 27 The Wichitas remained in Osage territory from 1863 to
1867, when they were returned to the Washita, arriving there in the spring
of 1868.

In reality, not all these refugees were Wichita. Of the 1,908 Indians shel¬
tered by the Osages as Wichitas, 392 were Wichitas, 155 were Wacos, 151
were Tawakonies, 362 were Caddos, 520 were Shawnees, 114 were Dela¬
wares, 70 were Creeks-Cherokees, and 144 were Keechies. 28 Most of the
refugees were Caddoean cousins of the Wichitas that the Osages had driven
to the Red River in the 1700s.

Aside from the act of mercy by the Osages to the Caddoean peoples and
Creeks, the refugee problem in Kansas brought an unexpected threat to the
Osages. The slavery controversy had brought a deluge of both northern and
southern settlers to Kansas (see Fig. 38). Many of these were only “voting
day residents,” but a majority truthfully became Kansas settlers. Although
intruders on Indian reservations were an old story, it all changed with the
new type of intrusion into the Osage reservation.

Foremost among the characteristics of this new type of intrusion was the
volume and short time span of the intrusion. Never before had so many
settlers intruded on an Indian reserve in such a short time span. One must
also be aware that these intruders were not the usual “woodsy intruder.” In
contrast to the “woodsy,” these new intruders were not easily bluffed or
frightened off the reserve. Generally, they were a strong, vigorous, “get
things done” type of people. They were more resourceful than the typical

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

White Man’s War Visits the Osages / 267

“woodsy” in devising ways to dispossess the Indian of the land that they
wanted.

These settlers made no secret about their desires; they wanted all Indians
out of Kansas. This included not only the refugee Indians but those who
owned lands in Kansas as well. Senator James Lane of Kansas had ambitions
that agreed with the settlers’ desires. In 1864, he managed to pilot a bill
through Congress to remove the refugee Indians from Kansas. Under the
guise of removing refugee Indians, the bill included a provision to extin¬
guish all Indian land titles in Kansas . 29 An insight into the settlers’conscience,
or rather their lack of conscience, is their comment on removal as “an act
of justice to the Indians and to the people of Kansas.” 30

INDIAN RECONSTRUCTION

Indian Reconstruction was different in some respects from Reconstruction
in the Confederate and border states, although it did share the bitterness and
vindictiveness. Fortunately for the Osages, they were spared the foul breath
of Indian Reconstruction. After 1865, the Cherokee and the five tribes no
longer were favored by treaties that took from the Osages to benefit the five
nations. While this did not place the Osages in a favored position, it did
place them in a position to receive some consideration as an outgrowth of
their support of the Union.

Because of their participation in the Confederate Treaty, the Osages were
represented at the Reconstruction Council held in September of 1865 at
Fort Smith, Arkansas. Although the Council was primarily intended for the
five nations, many other nations were also represented. Besides the Osages
there were members of the Wichita, Caddo, Seneca, Shawnee, Quapaw, and
Wyandot (Huron) attending. 31

During the thirteen-day council, the concessions the five nations would
have to make to resume relations with the United States were discussed. The
four basic concessions had a considerable effect on both the Osages and the
Indian Territory in the years between 1865 and 1907. These are as follows:

1) each tribe must enter into a treaty for permanent peace and amity
among themselves and with the United States;

2) slavery must be abolished and steps taken to incorporate the freedmen
into the tribes as citizens with rights guaranteed;

3) each tribe must agree to surrender a portion of its lands to the United
States for colonizing tribes from Kansas and elsewhere; and

4) tribal leaders must agree to the policy of uniting all tribes of the In¬
dian Territory into a single, consolidated government.” 32

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

268 / White Man’s War Visits the Osages

Concessions three and four were the two that had the most effect on the
Osages. It was the third requirement that made it possible for the Osages to
buy their present reservation. The Osages clung to the fourth requirement,
which was meant to create an Indian State, until 1907. They were the last
Indians to give up the dream of the Indian state. In lieu of an Indian state,
the Osages demanded that their reservation be kept intact as one govern¬
mental unit if they were to agree to become a part of the proposed state of
Oklahoma. This is why Osage County and the Osage reservation have
identical boundaries.

IN THE WAKE OF THE FOUR HORSEMEN

The Osages had met the four horsemen. They paid a terrible price as the
horsemen rode roughshod among the people, but they survived. They emerged
from this terrible period decimated and sapped of energy as well as re¬
sources. They were sick of the white man and only wanted to place distance
between themselves and the Euro-Americans. The Osage people had now
reached another bend in the River of Life. Was this to be the seventh bend
that would spell the end of the people or was it merely the second or third
bend?

What the Osages needed, more than anything else, was to be alone so
they could be themselves again. These starved, punished, invaded, betrayed
people who survived the charge of the four horsemen were hardly recog¬
nizable as the once proud and free Osages. Yet they had the undying spirit
of a people seasoned by adversity that carried them into survival and to
eventual conquest of the evils that beset them. This, above all else, saved the
Osages—they believed in themselves. They could and would solve the prob¬
lems they faced. They were a people with a hidden character trait of steel
tempered by ages of survival.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART FOUR

The Euro-American Affliction,

1865-1875

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Outcasts

COMMENTARY ON PART FOUR

Between 1865 and 1872, the great Osage people experienced fantastic in¬
dignities. An Osage scholar has pointed out: “Doubtless the discovery and
narration of these facts will be disturbing to every Osage now living as they
will be embarrassing to the living descendants of the old rugged, American
pioneers. But Osage history is not for the sensitive soul who would avoid
unpleasant facts.” 1

History always involves the pursuit and interpretation of truth. A person
may take truth and, according to that persons own interpretation, use it to
praise or condemn. Too often in the past, the facts have been used to con¬
demn the Osages and to praise other peoples.

There seems, however, to be a consensus among historians that the Osages
were terribly wronged in their last removal. The evidence is so conclusive
that it is revolting to any perceptive mind. Thus, for the reader, Part Four of
this history could be very disturbing.

BACKGROUNDS

Introduction

The Osage and Kansas Indians considered that they had owned and occu¬
pied the eastern one-third of Kansas since before 1700. That is, they had
occupied this area in the Indian sense of occupation. In the Euro-American
sense, the Osages had occupied this area since only shortly before 1825. Af¬
ter that date, Eastern Indians had been moved into the region. Thus, the
eastern one-third of Kansas became a wall of Indian nations which stood
in the way of the expansion-minded Euro-Americans who were stalled on
Missouri’s western border.

Thanks to Pike’s label of The Great American Desert, most Euro-Ameri-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

272 / The Outcasts

cans were not interested in the Great Plains. But it was necessary to cross
the Plains in order to reach the woodlands of the Far West. Generally, Indi¬
ans were willing to grant passage to the Far Western emigrants. Such agree¬
ments were ancient Indian practices. Yet, Indian custom required a gift for
passage and a conservation of wildlife while traversing the hunting grounds.
Widespread abuse of these customs by Euro-Americans was a constant
source of friction among the cultures.

For about one hundred twenty-five years, the Osages had acted as a bar¬
rier to Euro-Americans seeking to cross the Plains. Without a doubt, this
Osage barrier shielded the Plains nations from the Euro-Americans. As the
Osage shield became broken and shattered, the Plains nations felt the full
impact of the Euro-American affliction.

Being relatively inexperienced in Indian and Euro-American relation¬
ships, the Plains Indians tried to repel the intruders by force. Thus, a series
of Indian wars erupted upon the Plains after 1865. Unfortunately for the
Plains people, they faced a battle-hardened military force armed with the
most advanced weapons of Western civilization.

These Plains wars turned the frontier people against all Indians. Thus,
defeat of the Plains nations created an atmosphere of contempt toward In¬
dians in general. This was a prime factor in generating the disregard for
Osage rights and brought about the demand for their removal. So, the Indian
wars on the Plains are also an important part of Osage history.

Viewpoints

As humans, we see the world through a window of beliefs. While this gives
us a sharp focus on what we want to see, it sometimes prevents us from
seeing how wrong we are. Therefore, it is important that we understand how
Euro-Americans saw the Indian during any given period.

Jefferson set the pattern for beliefs about Indians during his generation.
He saw the Indian as a farmer who through intermarriage would become
a Euro-American. By the end of the Civil War (1865), Euro-Americans had
radically revised this Jeffersonian view. In this period, the Indian was re¬
garded as one of the “damned.” Thus, the “elect” was ordained by God to,
“Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.” 2 Indians
had rejected the Christian God and the Euro-American civilization. In do¬
ing this, they were damned and could not be saved. These actions were taken
as a clear indication that God meant for the Euro-Americans to have the
Indian lands.

These concepts became especially harsh after they had been filtered
through the minds of the Civil War generals. The commander of the Mili¬
tary Division of the Missouri, Lt. Gen. P. H. Sheridan, had this to say in

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Outcasts / 273

1882: “the majority of the wasteful and hostile occupants of millions of
acres of valuable agricultural, pasture, and mineral lands [had] been forced
upon reservations under the supervision of the Government . . . and the
vast section over which the wild and irresponsible tribes once wandered
[were] redeemed from idle waste to become homes for millions of progres¬
sive people.” 3

Sheridan uses some words (i.e., “wasteful,” “hostile,” “wild,” “irrespon¬
sible,” and “wandered”) that carry a heavy cargo. It would be interesting to
carefully analyze these terms and compare them with truth. In contrast
to the derogatory terms used against Indians, the sweet, heroic words used
to describe the achievements of Western civilization stand out. We will have
reason in this chapter and those following to examine the meaning of the
words, “been forced upon reservations under the supervision of the govern¬
ment.”

The United States’ experience with the Plains Indians involves more than
regional history. One must view the evolution of attitudes toward the In¬
dian as a part of the worldwide expansion of the United States. As the In¬
dian was treated, so were other people in the so-called third world treated.
In a sense, Indians were placed in the same category as the peoples of any
other subjugated nation. Yet Indians often hear of the fiction of sovereignty.
The Euro-Americans illogically treat Indians as a conquered people, ac¬
knowledging that they had been sovereign yet, at the same time, denying
that they had ever been sovereign.

Government Relationships

There can be no doubt that puppet rulers were created among the Indian
nations. This was a natural outgrowth of the Euro-American concept of the
strong-leader government. 4 That Indian peoples limited the power of their
leaders and placed the real power in the hands of the people did not matter.
Thus, to treat with the Euro-Americans, Indians were forced to restructure
their political organization. As long as the Indian held the power over Euro-
Americans, they went through the formalities of treating through a pseudo
strong leader merely as a matter of courtesy to guests in their territory. It is
interesting to note, however, that the United States created their own ver¬
sion of government in the later insular possessions.

Anatole France once remarked, “The law is enforced with fine imparti¬
ality, rich and poor alike are hung for sleeping under bridges.” France was
making a distinction between law and justice. Too many of us assume the
two are one and the same. “Justice Holmes argues in The Common Law
(1881) that law only reflects the standards of a majority, not the will of God
or even more sensitive consciences.” 5 When one fully considers the irnpli-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

274 / The Outcasts

cation of these quotes a chilling thought enters the mind. What was done
to the Osages and other Indians in Kansas was surely not just, but it was done
legally under United States law.

As one reads the views of some government officials, an utter contempt
toward Indians is revealed. Congressional Acts with Indian consent had been
substituted for treaty-making in 1871, but even this did not satisfy some
officials. Commissioner Edward P. Smith remarked in 1873: “We have in
theory over sixty-five independent nations within our borders, with whom
we have entered into treaty relations as being sovereign peoples; and at the
same time the white agent is sent to control and supervise these foreign
powers, and care for them as wards of the government. So far, and as rapidly
as possible, all recognition of Indians in any other relation than strictly as
subjects of the Government should cease.” 6

We can clearly see that the attitudes and views of the majority were also
reflected by the United States government in its laws. It was in Kansas as a
product of the Indian Wars and removal that these views solidified into an
organized concept.

Manifest Destiny

As early as 1837, in a Phi Beta Kappa speech, Horace Bushnell stated: “there
are too many prophetic signs admonishing us, that Almighty Providence is
pre-engaged to make this a truly great nation. . . . This western world had
not been preserved unknown through so many ages, for any purpose less
than sublime, than to be opened, at a certain stage of history, to become the
theater wherein better principles might have their action and free develop¬
ment. Out of all the inhabitants of the world, too, a select stock, the Saxon,
and out of this the British family, the noblest of the stock, was chosen to
people our country.” 7 The egoism and absolute ethnocentrism so obvious
in this speech was typical of Manifest Destiny.

We have often heard the adage, “As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.”
A parody of this is, “What a nation practices at home, it practices abroad.”
Indian policy, which was based upon Manifest Destiny, is a classic example
of this rule. Treatment of the Indian set the pattern for treatment of third
world people.

Manifest Destiny was clearly present in Commissioner Francis A. Walker s
Annual Report in 1872:

No one will rejoice more heartily than the present Commissioner
when the Indians of this country cease to be in a position to dictate,
in any form or degree, to the Government; when, in fact, the last hos¬
tile tribe becomes reduced to the condition of supplicants for charity.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Outcasts / 275

This is, indeed, the only hope of salvation for the aborigines of the
continent. If they stand up against the progress of civilization and
industry, they must be relentlessly crushed. The westward course of
population is neither to be denied nor delayed for the sake of all the
Indians that ever called this country their home. They must yield or
perish; and there is something that savors of providential mercy in
the rapidity with which their fate advances upon them, leaving them
scarcely the chance to resist before they shall be surrounded and dis¬
armed. 8

One may argue that the Commissioner was stating conditions as they
were and were yet to be. However, a person in a position to influence the
direction of events could also do more than reflect the status quo. This would
be especially true when that person was charged with the responsibility of
attending to the affairs of Indians as a trust requirement.

We would be generating a great injustice if we did not point out that
efforts were made to stem the tide of Manifest Destiny. While these efforts
did not materially aid the Indian, it is possible they eased the impact some¬
what. It is more significant that there were individuals who did make a
sincere effort to prevent a great wrong. Such people, who are present in all
societies both great and small, lift humanity above the level of beasts.

The Indian Condition

Commissioner Walker, despite his weakness as a leader in Indian reform, was
an excellent observer. His summation of the Indian condition and its cause
is accurate and to the point:

The freedom of expansion which is working these results is to us
of incalculable value. To the Indian it is of incalculable cost. Every year’s
advance of our frontier takes in a territory as large as some kingdoms
of Europe. We are richer by hundreds of millions; the Indian is poorer
by a large part of the little that he has. This growth is bringing impe¬
rial greatness to the nation; to the Indian it brings wretchedness, des¬
titution, beggary. Surely, there is obligation found in considerations
like these, requiring us in some way, and in the best way, to make good
to these original owners of the soil the loss by which we so greatly
gain. 9

The Commissioner did not stand alone in his observations of the Indian s
condition. On November 23, 1869, the first Report of the Board of Indian
Commissioners was made. While this report also reflected the same obser-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

276 / The Outcasts

vations as the Commissioners Report, it also contained a long list of sug¬
gested reforms. 10

We do not want to saturate the reader with the wrongs wrought against
Indians. Our purpose in touching upon these topics is to show what was
done and why it was done. Wars are usually the result of real or imagined
wrongs that have accumulated over time. As Jefferson expressed it in the
Declaration of Independence, “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind
requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the sepa¬
ration.” This is followed by a long list of real and imagined wrongs the
colonists had suffered under George III.

The preceding topics give the reasons that drove the Plains Indians to go
to war against the United States. We have seen how views shape policy.
Now we will see the effect of these policies and views.

INDIAN WARS ON THE PLAINS

Sand Creek and the “Hancock War”

While many Indian nations went to war on the Plains, some did not. Black
Kettle tried at first to keep his Cheyennes at peace. After requesting a peace
council, Black Kettle camped on Sand Creek near Fort Lyon, Colorado. As
a peace sign, he flew the United States flag on a tall pole.

In November of 1864, Colonel J. M. Chivington and the Third Colorado
Cavalry fell upon Black Kettles people. Without any warning or provoca¬
tion, men, women, and children were killed without mercy. Chivington
claimed they killed five hundred Indians. Black Kettle survived to later en¬
ter the fight against American troops, only to be killed in the Battle of the
Washita. 11

This wanton act of violence against the Cheyenne shocked the nation
and brought some efforts toward reform. However, after 1864 most of the
Plains people were distrustful of the United States military forces and the
intent of the government. Thus, when General W S. Hancock sought to
bring peace to the Plains by a display of manpower supported by artillery,
he found the Indian elusive, combative, and not the least terrorized. The
so-called Hancock War was a total failure. Some argue that Custer was made
the scapegoat for this failure. Certainly Custer was relieved of his duties for
a year at the close of the Hancock War. 12

Medicine Lodge

Because of Hancock s failure, a treaty commission came to the Plains in the
summer of 1867. This commission held one of the largest known Indian
councils at Medicine Lodge, Kansas, in the Osage reserve. Approximately
five thousand Indians attended this council, and some estimates go much

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Outcasts / 277

higher. The Osages were there as uninvited observers, since their traditional
enemies the Comanches, Kiowas, Kiowa-Apache, Arapahoes, and Cheyennes
were the main participants. 13 Also attending was Isadawah, the head Wichita
chief who was later slain by an Osage mourning party. The Osages appeared
only twice, each time either merely to observe or to insult the Euro-Ameri¬
cans. Among the Prairie/Plains tribes, to eat a person’s food and then leave
without a word or sign is the supreme insult. Since the Osages demanded
food and the Euro-Americans supplied it, the direction of the insult was
clear. The insult was not directed to the other Indians present, and they were
well aware of this.

It was a nervous collection of Euro-Americans who camped on Medi¬
cine Lodge Creek in the fall of 1867. Recognizing that the few hundred
troops, reporters, and commissioners could be easily overcome by the Indi¬
ans made them nervous. They well knew the Indians had reason enough, and
more, to destroy them all. One of the reporters who was then working for
the Missouri Democrat was Henry M. Stanley, who later achieved fame as the
discoverer of Dr. Livingstone in Africa. 14

The Cheyenne were making medicine down on the Cimarron and thus
would be late. On October 19, 1867, the Arapahoes, Apaches, Comanches,
and Kiowas started the Council. While the Arapahoes were present, they
decided to wait and council with the Cheyenne. Both sides spent consider¬
able time airing their problems.

On October 21, a prepared treaty was laid on the table. By October 25,
all but the Cheyenne and Arapaho had signed the treaty, which ceded thou¬
sands of acres to the United States. Of special interest to the Osages was an
agreement to grant hunting privileges south of the Arkansas River to the
nations signing the treaty. 15 One wonders where the United States acquired
the authority to grant this privilege allowing these nations to hunt in rec¬
ognized Osage territory.

After the Council, presents were brought out and placed in three great
piles. The middle mound was for the Cheyenne, the eastern heap was for
the Kiowa and Comanche, and the remaining pile to the west was for the
Arapaho and Apache. Aside from these gifts, vast amounts of food, clothing,
and ammunition were also distributed. 16

The Treaty of Medicine Lodge brought an uneasy peace to the Plains for
a time. However, hostilities began again in the fall of 1868. As another series
of wars developed, the Osages entered the conflict as scouts for the troops.

The Battle of Arickaree Creek

General Sherman received reports of about two hundred Indians moving
into northwest Kansas from Colorado. Sherman dispatched Colonel Forsythe
and fifty experienced frontiersmen to check the movements of these Indi-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

278 / The Outcasts

ans. This force camped on a branch of the Republican Fork called Arickaree
Creek. 17

At dawn on September n, Indians were discovered. The command took
a position on nearby Beecher’s Island and repelled the first charge. A second
charge was led by Roman Nose, the Cheyenne chief. Roman Nose was
killed and the attack ceased. Dull Knife led the third charge, which was also
turned back. A scout managed to reach Ft. Wallace with news of the con¬
tinuing battle, and troops were immediately sent to relieve the besieged
force. 18

This battle of several days duration set off a series of engagements
throughout the Central Plains. General Sheridan had been placed in com¬
mand of the South Central Plains. He immediately prepared for a winter
campaign against the Plains Indians. One of his first actions was to restore
Custer as commander of the Seventh cavalry. 19

The Battle of the Washita
The Osage Scouts

Most of the Central Plains Indians were wintering in Southwest Oklahoma
during the winter of 1868-69. Sheridan was having a considerable amount
of trouble locating the Indian camps and even more trouble in forcing a
fight.

Custer sent an officer to White Hair’s village to see if Osage scouts could
be obtained. He knew the Osages had successfully fought the Plains Indians
for over a hundred years. If he could obtain Osage scouts, their experi¬
ence would be valuable to his forces. Little Beaver of the White Hair Little
Osages and his counselor Hard Rope, with eleven warriors and an inter¬
preter, agreed to scout for Custer. These fourteen Osage scouts were paid the
regular soldier’s pay, plus they were given weapons, clothing, and a mount. 20

The last of the Osage scouts to die was Big Wild Cat. Custer was called
Paw hit Stet sy (Long Hair) by the Osages. C.J. Phillips was one of the two
editors of The Osage Magazine in 1910, but in 1892 he ran a trading post.
Big Wild Cat came into the post one day and ordered a silk American flag.
It was eight feet long, like the one Custer carried on the Washita. Big Wild
Cat wanted it to fly over his grave so everyone would know a soldier was
buried there. 21

Hard Rope was another of Custer’s scouts. He was one of the signers of
the protest against the Sturgis or Drum Creek Treaty. As mentioned earlier,
he was also one of the leaders in the fight against the Confederate officers
near Independence, Kansas. On March 29,1869, Custer gave Hard Rope the
following citation: “Hard Rope, the bearer, is head war chief of the Osages.
He was with me on all my marches and campaigns since Nov. 1, 1868, par-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Outcasts / 279

ticipating in the battle of the Washita, and particularly distinguishing him¬
self by his skill in discovering and following trails. He is a man of excellent
judgement, and is a true friend of the white man.” 22

Eugene “Gene” Herard of Elgin, Kansas, loved to tell this tale about
Hard Rope: “Some years ago delegations of Pawnees and Osages were con¬
ferring near Elgin, Kansas, trying to adjust a claim of the Pawnees for one
of their members killed by the Osages. Hard Rope appeared late, after the
conference had lasted all day without results. He stood for nearly an hour
without saying a word. Then he held up his hand and said to the Pawnees:
We give you fifty ponies and you go home. You can’t kill any Osages. If
you don't take horses and go home, we kill you.’ ” 23

The only other member of this group of Osage scouts for whom accu¬
rate identification exists is Little Beaver. Little Beaver is Shop pe Shin ka in
Osage. The Osage Mission Register gives his name as Shabeskinga and
Biever. His second daughter was Marie Me Gva to or Hawk Woman. 24 This
would indicate that Little Beaver was from the Mottled Eagle Clan. The
Register also identifies Little Beavers Town as Briar’s Town. This was only
three miles southeast of the Mission and very near the mixed-blood settle¬
ment on Flat Rock Creek. The Little Beaver who was among Custer’s scouts
and signed the Confederate treaty was John Beaver or Little Beaver II. In
his old age he shared the chiefs office with Sophia Chouteau, who was
called Mother Chouteau.

The Battle

Sheridan’s troops did a considerable amount of moving around. They finally
arrived at Camp Supply, which is at the junction of Wolf and Beaver Creeks
in Oklahoma. This was on the south side of the North Canadian River
about thirty-five miles east of the iooth Meridian. 23

Custer left Camp Supply early on the morning of November 23, 1868.
The attack of Black Kettle’s village was at dawn on November 27. 26 For
once, the impatient Custer listened to good Osage advice and held back his
attack until dawn. After a rest of about an hour, Custer visited among the
various clusters of shivering men. It was very cold and sleep was all but im¬
possible without fires.

The Osages did not tell Custer until after the battle that they did not
entirely trust him. It was their belief that if the battle did not go well, Custer
would betray them to the Cheyenne. Thinking that they could best protect
themselves behind the standard bearer, they took this position in the attack.
By virtue of this position, they were in the midst of the heaviest fighting. 27

Custer had divided his command of eight hundred men into four nearly
equal parts. Each section was to attack the village from a different direction.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

280 / The Outcasts

Thus, the Cheyenne were caught in a trap with little chance of escape. Cus¬
ter reported 103 warriors killed and sixteen women and a “few” children. 28

An interesting sidelight to the Osage association with Custer is given in
the Kansas Historical Collections. The citation states: “Some of these Osages
[Washita Scouts] were killed in the massacre of Custer and his army on the
Little Bighorn river in Montana.” 29 We had heard a rumor in our youth that
an Osage and Delaware were with Custer on the Little Bighorn and had
escaped by mingling with the attacking Indians. In any event, no real proof
of either story has been found.

REPUDIATION OF THE MEDICINE LODGE TREATY

The Peace Commission was outraged by the renewal of hostilities on the
Plains in the summer of 1868. The blame was placed on the Indians, so the
recommendation of the Commission to repudiate the treaty would seem to
be justified. They suggested abrogating the right to hunt south of the Ar¬
kansas River to limit the hunting area. Also, the suggestion was made that
these Indians should be confined to their reservations. 30 In time, some of
these restrictions were also placed upon the Osages. An uneasy peace settled
over the Plains after the Battle of the Washita. However, only the military
force of the United States restrained the Plains people.

General Sherman had already abrogated the right to hunt anywhere
south of the Arkansas River. Little effort was made to punish the Indians
causing the outbreaks. Peaceful people were more easily located and pun¬
ished. Ralph K. Andrist notes that “the Army subscribed to the genial the¬
ory that one Indian was as good as another for purposes of punishment, and
neither Sherman nor Sheridan was going to change the system.” 31

It was this way of thinking that caused the Kansas intruders to treat the
Osages as if they were blood-thirsty savages. There can be little doubt that
the Indian wars on the Plains gave the intruders additional ammunition to
use against the Osages. These wars provided the necessary emotions for ac¬
tions that lay outside normality. Without this emotional stimuli, it is likely
that the Osage removal would have been much easier.

In the physical sciences, we are told that nature abhors a vacuum. The
same law seems to be present in human relationships. If government does
not enforce its laws, lawless acts will fill the void and replace the order of
law. High emotions and the failure of the United States to enforce its own
Indian laws brought the Osages to their lowest stage of degradation.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865

CANVILLE TREATY
The Unratified Treaty of 1863

In response to the intruders’ desires for Osage lands in the rich Neosho Val¬
ley, an effort was made to extinguish the Osage title. A treaty was made in
1863 with this purpose in mind. 1,500 square miles of area was to be taken
from the eastern part of the Osage reserve. The total price to be paid was
$300,000/

A second cession of a trust area twenty miles wide along the north side
of the Osage reserve was also made. The Kansas school sections of sixteen
and thirty-six were to be set aside in the trust area but not in the ceded
lands along the Neosho River. A total of twenty-five cents an acre was to
be paid to the Osages for these trust lands. However, when the treaty was
again submitted to the Osages for amendment, they refused the terms and
the treaty died. 2

One important point that was omitted in the proposed treaty of 1863
was included in the treaty of 1865. No mention is made of the eventual
removal of the Osages in the proposed treaty of 1863. This may seem sur¬
prising in light of the known Kansas policy of removing all Indians from
the state. 3 Yet if one considers the need to keep the Osages friendly to the
Union it made sense not to antagonize them during the Civil War.

Reasons for the Treaty of 1865

There can be no room for doubt that the basic reason for the Treaty of 1865
and eventual Osage removal was the desire for Osage lands. These reasons are
stated by Superintendent Elijah Sells, who negotiated the Canville Treaty
of 1865 with the Osages: “The Osage Reservation is within the geographi¬
cal limits of the State of Kansas, and white settlements are crowding down
upon Indian lands and in many instances within the Indian reservation. The

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

282 / Osage Land Cession of 1865

imminent danger of conflict between the whites and the Indians as well as
the demands for these lands for white settlement by the authorities of and
settlers in Kansas furnishes satisfactory reasons why the Indian title to these
lands should be extinguished at an early date.” 4

The Canville Treaty contained some unusual wording. While we will
discuss this in the next section, we must point out that the intent of the
treaty was not to provide benefits to the enemies of the Osages. In effect,
this was clearly a nonreason for the treaty. Instructions to the Treaty Com¬
missioners make it very clear “that no part of such ceded lands shall be
appropriated to Indians not on friendly relations with the party making the
cession.” 5

Through interpretation of the unusual wording, the BIA was enabled to
create a “slush fund” for all Indians and some Negroes. The Osage ceded
lands totaled 871,791.11 acres. From the sale of these lands, the cost of sur¬
veying the tract and $300,000 were subtracted. A balance of $776,931.58
was deposited in a “slush fund” which was called the “Civilization Fund.”
Money from this fund was spent for the benefit of Indians friendly and un¬
friendly to the Osages, which was a violation of the spirit of the treaty. The
Osage and Kaw together received only $189.55 from this fund. 6

CIVILIZATION FUND
The Problem

Article One of the Canville Treaty contains an excess of legal jargon. Over
and above the usual “legalese,” a key section of the article contains poor
sentence structure. This section comes near the end of the Article, which is
exceptionally long and complicated: “[T]he remaining proceeds of sales
shall be placed in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the
‘Civilization fund’ to be used under the direction of the Secretary of the
Interior for the education and civilization of Indian tribes residing within
the limits of the United States.” 7

Over one hundred tribes benefited from this fund. It was not the Osage
intent to be the benefactor to all these Indians. Their great concern was that
they did not want their money to be expended to aid the Osages who had
gone to Mexico and Canada during the War of 1812 and the Civil War. 8
Thus, in an effort to exclude those who had abandoned the Osage people,
an unintended wording was introduced into the treaty.

The bulk of the money placed in the Civilization Fund was used to es¬
tablish and maintain certain “Indian” schools. Among these were Hampton
School; Carlisle School; Forest Grove School, Oregon; Pacific University,
Oregon; Octanah School; Freedman School; Albuquerque School; Salem

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865 / 283

School; Genoa School; Fort Stevensen School, North Dakota; Howard Uni¬
versity at Washington; and Haskell Institute at Lawrence, Kansas. None of
these schools were for the exclusive benefit of the Osages. Most of them
were of no benefit whatsoever to the Osages and at least Hampton School,
Freedman School, and Howard University were not for Indians in a recon¬
struction legal sense. 9

After years of protest and expense, the Osages were finally paid for this
injustice, insofar as the money was concerned. However, there is no way to
assess the suffering and deaths among the Osage people because of such a
long delayed payment. The battle to claim what was theirs is a long, classic
example of Indian Policy fumblings.

Reasons for Delaying Objections

The Osages voiced protest of the Civilization Fund provision at the council
negotiating the Drum Creek Treaty in 1868. Article Eight of the Drum
Creek Treaty states: “If the proceeds of the sale of the lands ceded to the
United States by the first article of the treaty of January 21, 1867 [ratifica¬
tion date of Canville Treaty], shall exceed the amount of purchase money
paid therefor by the United States and expenses incident to the survey and
sale thereof then the remaining proceeds shall be invested by the Osages in
United States registered stocks and the interest thereon applied semi-annu¬
ally as other annuities.” 111 Without a doubt the Osages thought the problem
was corrected, although the Drum Creek Treaty was not ratified. By 1870,
the failure of the treaty to pass in the Senate again stirred the Osages.

The United States had enacted legislation to make it easier for settlers to
purchase land in the Osage ceded tract. This delayed the flow of money from
land sales, so it did not become evident until after 1870 that surplus monies
were being diverted into the Civilization Fund. 11

One must bear in mind that in 1865 the Osages were in a terrible con¬
dition because of the controversy over slavery. The swarm of intruders upon
their reserve between 1865 and 1870 only worsened their plight. They des¬
perately needed the annuities from the sale of the ceded and trust lands. The
removal in 1870-75 added to the troubles of the Osage, who could best be
described at this time as being on the edge of extinction. Thus, this was not
a simple matter of dollars that were eventually repaid but a matter of great
suffering and loss of life because of governmental blunders.

All previous treaties made with the Osages had provided that the total
benefits were to devolve upon the Osages. They had no reason to suspect
that a new principle in treaty-making had been introduced in this last rati¬
fied Osage treaty. One claim notes that this is “the first and only time in
the history of Indian treaties or agreements in which the United States had

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

284 / Osage Land Cession of 1865

acquired the lands of one Indian Tribe and used the proceeds of its sale for
the benefit of other Indians.” 12

Communication Problems

Surely a major problem of communication is evident in the time consumed
in the negotiation. At Canville s Post, a total elapsed time of three hours was
used in making the treaty. 13 The southern Osages at Ft. Smith were probably
rushed through the process as well, but the record is silent on this point. A
convention of Philadelphia lawyers could not fully understand this treaty in
three hours.

All negotiations were conducted with the full-bloods. Few among them,
if any, were fluent in English. The mixed-bloods, like the interpreters, spoke
frontier English and limited Osage. English was a recently acquired lan¬
guage, and most of the mixed-bloods were more accustomed to French. In
any event, none among the full-bloods or mixed-bloods were familiar with
the legal language used in the treaty. 14

Possibly the greatest communication problem was the Osage language
itself. The language consists of a few hundred root words (estimated as
2,000) which are compounded to enlarge meanings. This is a language of
a hunting culture. It is rich in terms of its own culture, but it is barren in
terms of the legal language of Western civilization. For example when Ne
ka Shu tsy (Red Man) is used, it signifies the Indians being addressed. When
speaking of other Indian people, the name of the tribe is used. The word U
Ke te means “others” or “foreign,” but it is also an insult, so it would not be
used in treaty negotiating. 15 Thus, the Osages would have a very different
interpretation of Article One than its various meanings in English.

Comments on the Error

The United States and their representatives made two admissions of the
error in creating the Civilization Fund. First, admission was made in Article
Eight of the Drum Creek Treaty. Another admission was made by a 1941
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs: “These Indians who have been denied
relief under a technical legal construction of the acts of Congress are mor¬
ally and equitably entitled to the sum which the United States received and
expended for the relief of other Indian Tribes.” 16

An inherent conflict exists in the strange relationship between the United
States and the Indian nations. It is to avoid similar conflicts that the legisla¬
tive, judicial, and executive powers of the United States government are
separated. In the guardian-ward relationship, the conflict arises when the
guardian also acts as an adversary in bargaining. Thus it is easy for abuses to
enter the relationship.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865 / 285

In the Treaty of 1865, the United States, acting in its own interest, ne¬
glected the interests of its ward. In the language of Indian law this is termed
overreachment, in view of the Osage naivety. Thus, while the United States
acted honorably in its own right, it committed a dishonorable act toward its
Osage wards. Recognizing the error in this conflict of interest and correct¬
ing it was an act of justice.

The Treaty of 1865 is especially notable because it precipitated a whole
chain of events. One cannot discuss Osage removal from Kansas without
including this treaty and the storm it generated among the Osages, the Kan¬
sas intruders, and settlers, as well as the railroad corporations. From 1865 to
1871, the history of Southeast Kansas was heavily influenced by this treaty.
To some extent, it shaped and gave impetus to the Populist Revolt in Kansas.

THE OSAGE LANDS IN KANSAS
School Lands

Neosho and Labette counties in Kansas were what had been called the
Osage Ceded Lands. The Treaty of 1865 did not provide for any school land
grants in this cession. However, by a congressional Act of April 10, 1869,
sections sixteen and thirty-six of both the Ceded and Trust Lands were set
aside for schools. Thus, 22,408 acres were set aside in Labette County and
20,480 acres in Neosho County. 17

Sections sixteen and thirty-six were not always available, since they were
sometimes preempted. The Kansas state constitution provides for this even¬
tuality in Section Three, Part One: “ First —That sections numbered sixteen
and thirty-six, in every township of public lands in said State, and where
either of said sections or any part thereof has been sold or otherwise been
disposed of, other lands, equivalent thereto, and as contiguous as may be,
shall be granted to said State for the use of schools.” 18 This insured that
Kansas education would be financed. However, the special Act of April 10,
1869, was necessary because of school lands omission in the Treaty of 1865.
The wording of the key part of the Act is interesting, “And provided, fur¬
ther, That the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections in each township of said
lands [Ceded and Trust Lands] shall be reserved for State school purposes In
accordance with the act of admission of the State of Kansas: Provided, how¬
ever, That nothing in this act shall be construed in any manner affecting any
legal rights heretofore vested in any other party or parties.” 19

The last proviso of this act raises the question, Did the Osages still have
a vested legal right in the Ceded Lands? They surely had a legal trust interest
in the Trust Lands. However, the problem at hand is to determine if the
Osages were ever paid for the school sections in the Ceded Lands.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

286 / Osage Land Cession of 1865

Action on this question was not taken by Congress until the spring of
1880. Chapter 251 of the Act of June 16, 1880, deals with this question.
Section One deals with the Trust Lands and provides payment for the Kansas
school sections in the Trust Area. The last proviso of Section Two deals with
the Ceded Lands: “Provided that a like settlement shall be made with the
Indian-civilization fund for the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections, given
by the United States to the State of Kansas, within the limits of the Osage
lands, ceded by the first article of the treaty aforsaid.” 211 This act makes a
clear point that, while the Osages were paid for the school sections in the
Trust Lands, they were not paid for the school sections in the Ceded Lands
until much later, and then only by indirect means.

Since the Civilization Fund received the school sections money for the
Ceded Lands, ultimately, the Osages were paid for the land. As mentioned
earlier through the Claims Cases, the Civilization Fund less the expenses
(off-set) was paid to the Osages in recent years.

Ceded Lands
Railroad Land Sales

Many intruders had made illegal improvements within what later became
the Osage Ceded Lands. This was, in part, done with the supposition that
the Homestead and Preemption Act of 1862 would prevail in the Ceded
Tract. Unfortunately for these intruders, the Treaty of 1865 specifically set
aside the Act of 1862 insofar as the Ceded Lands were concerned. This was
done so the railroads could take up all the Ceded Lands as their right of
ways and land grants.

Frederic Jackson Turner, the original frontier historian, identified two
types of pioneer farmers. The first was the “woodsy,” people who went into
the Indian lands and built their “half-face” camps or crude cabins. If possi¬
ble, they took over Indian “old fields.” If this was not possible, they made
“girdled clearings.” These were the improvements that they either sold to
the second pioneer farmer or used as the basis for their preemption claim.

The second type of pioneer farmer was what Jackson called the equip¬
ment farmer. This settler was fairly well financed and had some personal
property for collateral. The railroads had no more use for the first type of
pioneer farmer than the Indians. It was the equipment farmer who bought
the railroad lands and paid the woodsy for his improvements.

As Gates points out, the railroads used the improvements as a selling
point: “To the wealthier and more conservative class of immigrants who
follow in the wake of adventurous pioneers, who value railroad facilities and
the advantages of a comparatively well settled country, and are willing to
pay something for them, no better opportunity can be found than is here
afforded to buy land on which a commencement has already been made.” 21

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865 / 287

The Leavenworth, Lawrence, and Galveston Railroad Company was the
main beneficiary from the Osage Ceded Lands. In probability, most of the
land sold by the LL&G in 1871-72 was from the Ceded Lands. In this time
span, 42,539 acres were sold. The average price was $8.15 an acre. 22 Origi¬
nally, the Osages received about 35 cents an acre. Approximately three cents
per acre was used to pay for the survey and selling costs to the United
States. The LL&G acquired the land for $1.25 an acre.

No matter how you compute it, a minimum profit of over $29,000,000
is an amount that bewilders the mind. Something surely seems amiss when
the Osage share was only about one thirty-fourth of the total price ob¬
tained. However, by 1878 the LL&G had lost the unsold Osage Ceded Lands.
Since the Osages did not have the franchise, their complaints were not ef¬
fective. But the settlers did have a vote and, hence, the Ceded Lands were
placed in the public domain, though not without a bitter struggle.

The Ceded Lands Controversy

The Railroad Land Grant Act of March 1863 23 set the scene for a historic
struggle that was not to end until about 1875. This act made the Leaven¬
worth, Lawrence, and Galveston the beneficiary of land grants in Kansas. In
1866, a similar Act added the Missouri, Kansas, and Texas railroad to the
same land grant provisions. 24 Without a doubt, the congressional intent was
to encourage railway construction in sparsely settled Kansas. However, it
soon became apparent that the land grants had become as important as
operating a railroad. Railways, as land vendors, customarily sold land at a
higher price than the government. This price was usually double or triple
the standard price of $1.25 an acre charged by the government. It was this
price differential and not solicitations about the welfare of the Osages that
aroused controversy.

The debate centered around the status of the land immediately after and
during the ending of the Osage title. No question was raised about the
status of land already in the public domain. However, there was a very real
question about Indian lands acquired by treaty. 25 The question was whether
Osage lands could pass directly into private ownership without entering the
public domain. If the answer was “no,” the settler stood to gain land at a
lower cost or to have the Homestead and Preemption laws applied to newly
acquired Indian lands. As already noted, the railroads stood to gain a vast
fortune if the newly acquired Indian lands could pass directly into private
ownership. The Osages stood at the end of the line in this battle of the
settlers versus the railroads.

More than land was involved in the Osage Ceded Lands controversy. This
controversy spilled over into the Drum Creek Treaty ratification attempt.
Both treaties, the Treaty of 1865 and Drum Creek, involved the new com-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

288 / Osage Land Cession of 1865

mercial-industrial favoritism that had emerged from the Civil War. Corpo¬
rate businesses grew by leaps and bounds in the immediate post-war days.
Leading this new unregulated corporate growth was the railroad corpora¬
tions.

No ethical guide to corporate action was available, since developments on
such a large scale were new to the American experience. In some respects,
the fur trade had established a pattern for corporate growth and operation,
but it was on a smaller scale. The Senate was a smaller body than the House
by virtue of limiting each state to two senators. Since the lower house was
selected by a popular vote, the House was more directly accountable to the
electorate than the Senate. State legislators selected the two national senators
for their state. This made the senators answerable to the state legislatures and
not the voters. Therefore, whoever controlled the state legislature controlled
the senators from that state.

This arrangement was an open invitation to the corporations. With their
pooled finance, it was easy for a corporation to “buy an election.” Also, a
favorable loan or gift could frequently buy a senatorial vote. Senators were
often supported by influential Indian Affairs officials who stood to profit
handsomely if key treaties were ratified or special laws were enacted. Thus,
Indian land cessions in Kansas were made by treaty as usual, but the land was
ceded to the railroad corporations. Like the preeminence of the corpora¬
tions, this was new to the American experience and a means to combat it
did not evolve until the ratification of the Osage Treaty of 1865.

The railroads had practically won their battle for the Osage Ceded Lands
when the settlers took their case to the courts. Although the Supreme Court
was divided, the majority ruled for the settlers in 1875. 26 Thus, while on the
brink of victory, the railroads fell into the chasm of defeat. By this time, the
Osages were settled on their new and last reservation. They were deeply
involved in trying to obtain their money from the Civilization Fund.

Osage Ceded Lands, Settler’s Protective Association

The settlers’ experiences with railroads and land speculators on the Dela¬
ware and Neutral Lands had proven the value of active, determined resis¬
tance. With these experiences still fresh on their minds, it was natural for the
settlers to form a resistance organization on the Ceded Lands. In time, the
Settlers Protective Association became “the government” on the Ceded
Lands. 27

In order to fight the issue of land ownership in the ceded lands, a special
assessment was levied upon the Association members. This formed a fund
for lawyer fees and court costs. After failure in the state courts, the case
reached the Supreme Court in 1875, as mentioned earlier. The Association

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865 / 289

members signed a promissory note to pay a fee of twenty-five cents an acre
if and when the lands were placed in the public domain. 28

It is a commentary on the character of the settlers that very little of this
modest fee was paid. In fairness to the settlers however, it should also be
mentioned that the fight was long and expensive. Crop failures had further
strained the meager resources of these squatters. Yet it is doubtful if these
poor homeless drifters would have paid the fees if times had been flourish¬
ing. Repeatedly, these people had promised everything until they got what
they wanted and then they delivered nothing.

The Osage Trust Lands
Description

So much has been made of the Osage Ceded Lands controversy that it is
easy to forget that the Treaty of 1865 also created the Osage Trust Lands.
While the Osage Ceded Lands amounted to 843,927 acres, the Osage Trust
Lands included 3,200,000 acres. These Osage Trust Lands were a twenty-
mile-wide tract along the north boundary of the remaining Osage Dimin¬
ished Reserve. They lay between the Osage Ceded Lands and the 100th
meridian.

By virtue of the fact that these lands were less desirable than the Osage
Ceded Lands, there was little controversy over them. The eastern one-third
of these Osage Trust Lands was originally known as the Grand Osage Prai¬
ries. However, today it is known as the Flint Hills. While a limited amount
of tillable land is in the swales and valleys of the region, most of the area is
covered with a thin layer of rocky soil.

As one moves west, the tall grasses of the Grand Osage Prairies give way
to the short grasses of the Great Plains. The western one-third of the Osage
Trust Lands was almost treeless and too dry for the agricultural practices of
the 1860s. This left the middle one-third, which at best was marginal agri¬
cultural land in the 1860s. One must realize that it takes special methods in
agriculture and special people to farm on the Great Plains.

Fort Dodge Reserve

The absence of publicity, which is usually associated with controversy, al¬
lowed an injustice to the Osages to pass unnoticed. So far as we could dis¬
cover, this has never been corrected either by credit to Osage accounts or
through the Claims Commission. As Ft. Dodge lost its usefulness, prepara¬
tions were made to close it down. In 1879, Senator Ingalls of Kansas intro¬
duced a bill to open the northern two-thirds of the Ft. Dodge Military
Reservation for homesteading. Believing the lands were available for home¬
steading, both Houses passed the bill.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

290 / Osage Land Cession of 1865

As preparations were being made to transfer this tract to the Interior
Department, a protest was voiced: “Henry Price, a commissioner with the
department found that part of the reservation [Fr. Dodge Military Reser¬
vation] had been carved from former Osage Reserve lands [Osage Trust
Lands] and that any funds accruing from their sale should be transferred to
a trust fund for the tribe.” 29 While this created what could have been a
problem, it was solved by the simple expedient of ignoring the protest. Thus,
the Osages were cheated out of part of their funds.

If a person were to draw upon Osage history for guidance into the fu¬
ture, a few object lessons are available. First and foremost, the Treaty of 1865
suggests that controversy forces facts into the open and tends to solidify
arguments. The object lesson here is to fight for what you think is right and
force the opposition to prove they are right. Publicize your position.

THE EFFECT OF THE BATTLE OVER OSAGE LANDS

As one looks at the role the Osages played in Southeast Kansas, there is a
tendency to see only the immediate effects. There can be little doubt that
this struggle had a modern nationwide effect. We must agree with others
who state this same line of thought. “In the last battle, the boomer had ac¬
quired lands previously guaranteed to the Indians, and serviced by railroads
—at the preemption price of unsurveyed wilderness. The states’ populist
tendencies were given a rousing lift.” 30

Kansas was noted for its populist leanings, and it was in the forefront of
the Populist Revolt of the late-i88os and early-i890s. The usual treatment
gives the Grange Movement credit for bringing the Populist Revolt into
reality. This ignores the role played by Indians and especially the Osage. It
was the struggle in Southeast Kansas that taught the agrarian people to fight
and organize to reach their goals. Their actions for influencing government
are reflected in the Populist Revolt.

Witness two of the most radical planks in the platform of 1891: (1) Gov¬
ernment ownership of railroads, telegraphs, and telephones; and (2) The re¬
turn to the government of all land held by railroads and other corporations
in excess of their needs. These are not the only planks that reflect the con¬
troversy in Southeast Kansas. A heavily graduated income tax was proposed
to prevent the accumulation of vast fortunes that could be used to “buy the
government.” Significantly, the platform also demanded the popular elec¬
tion of senators, the secret ballot, and the initiative, recall, and referendum.

It seems ironic that these agriculturists established the basic ideas of
modern urban-industrial America while urban minds were creating the
Communist Manifesto of 1887 for rural Russia. However, we can trace

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Land Cession of 1865 / 291

Populist concepts through the Progressives, such as Theodore Roosevelt,
who argued that a corporation was not entitled to a vote in American elec¬
tions. Essentially, the New Deal was a process of adapting the Populist ideas
to the realities of the twentieth century. The Populist Revolt was the last
creative overhaul of the American government, and the Osage lands gave a
gigantic shove to the infant revolution.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The End of Indian Treaty-Making

INTRODUCTION

The Osages are associated with some of the most remarkable legislation in
the history of Western civilization. Abolition of Indian treaty-making did
not make more than a ripple in the history of Western civilization. How¬
ever, Congress enacted legislation in 1862 that thrust the United States into
the position of leader of Western civilization and revolutionized agriculture
throughout the world.

Two senators named Morrill were responsible for legislation affecting the
Osages. Justin Smith Morrill of Vermont sponsored the Homestead and Pre¬
emption Act of 1862, as well as the Agriculture and Mechanical (A & M)
College Land Grant Act of the same year. Associated with the latter act
was the Hatch Act of 1887, which established agricultural experimental sta¬
tions. Justin Smith Morrill also sponsored the Railroad Land Grant Act. Lot
Myrick Morrill was a senator from Maine who stood up for the Osages. He
argued that under the Treaty of 1865 the Osages were promised Si.25 an
acre for their Kansas land should they agree to remove from Kansas. Thanks
to Lot Morrill, the Osages received a better price for their lands, which
insured their survival.

The Justin S. Morrill Acts encouraged the would-be agriculturists to in¬
vade the Osage Kansas lands. His actions also induced the railways to try to
obtain the Osage lands as a part of their land grants. These efforts were
successful in forcing the Osages to cede their Kansas lands and in ending the
process of Indian treaty-making. As Congress debated the Osage removal,
Lot M. Morrill argued the honor of the United States must be upheld and
that the Osages should be paid what had been promised to them.

Contributions of the A & M Colleges and their associated experimental
stations have brought new foods, larger agricultural production, and a greatly
expanded pool of trained engineers in the mechanical arts. Thus, the tri-part

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

End of Indian Treaty-Making / 293

expansion of the United States was generated (that is, the frontier of land
expansion, the frontier of industrial expansion, and the frontier of unprece¬
dented population growth).

This chapter will show how these events affected the decision to halt
Indian treaty-making. Our primary concern is to discuss the Osages, but if
we omitted showing how the Osages were involved in general history, we
would be as guilty as others who leave the Osages out of general histories.

THE DRUM CREEK TREATY

There were other Indian treaties beside the Drum Creek Treaty being con¬
sidered in 1868 and the two following years. However, due to the size of the
Osage Diminished Reserve (8,000,000 acres plus 3,200,000 in the Osage
Trust Lands, a round figure of 11,000,000 acres), the great treaty debate of
the late-1860s centered on the Drum Creek Treaty. 1 Intruders and state
government protest also pushed the Drum Creek Treaty to the center of the
stage. Without a doubt, the controversy over the Osage Ceded Lands, which
by 1868 had reached every corner of the nation, also tended to focus atten¬
tion upon the Drum Creek Treaty.

Surely, the House of Representatives was in no mood to allow the sale
of Indian lands by treaty to continue. A worse time could not have been
found to submit an Indian treaty to the Senate for ratification. At the time,
as David Parsons points out, “Congress had just finished a discussion of the
southern homestead Bill in which the land policy of the United States had
been ably reviewed and revitalized. Control of the public domain had just
been redeclared to be a prerogative of Congress. The treaty sale system of
disposing of Indian reservations had just been denounced by the House.” 2

On December 15, 1869, Representative Sidney Clarke of Kansas intro¬
duced a resolution which condemned the sale of Indian lands by treaty. This
resolution passed the House by unanimous consent. A threat embodied in
the resolution gave it sharp teeth that bit into the practice of land sales by
treaty: “this House will refuse hereafter to make any appropriations to carry
out the provisions of Indian treaties in which the terms of this resolution
are not adhered to.” 2

Because all bills of revenue must originate in the House, this threat was
especially significant. To phrase it differently, although the Senate had the
treaty-making power, the House controlled the purse strings. It was actions
such as this that ended treaty-making with Indians.

So far as the Osages were concerned at the time, they had no particular
feeling either for or against treaty-making. In practice, agreements by treaty
and agreements by congressional act seemed the same to the Osages. This

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

294 / End of Indian Treaty-Making

was because almost all special Indian Bills provide a condition of approval
by the Indians involved.

We would not want to engage in a debate on the question of constitu¬
tional hierarchy of laws. If we assume the Constitution and treaties made
under the Constitution are the supreme law of the land, then the Osages lost
an advantage with the ending of Indian treaty-making. But, if acts of Con¬
gress stand above or equal with Indian treaties, the Osages gained an advan¬
tage. In a partial answer it would appear that while treaties and the Consti¬
tution stand above Congress, the Supreme Court has placed Indian treaties
in a special class, which lowers the status of such treaties in comparison with
other treaties.

INDIAN TREATIES IN
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Introduction

No human action stands apart from its time and place. Thus, Indian treaty¬
making varied from place to place and from time to time. All history shows
periods of great morality and periods of venality. Likewise, we find great
swings from one extreme to its opposite. Like a pendulum swinging first to
one side then to the other, history unfolds before our eyes. Thus, it is prudent
to examine the path of Indian treaty-making.

Indian Treaty-Making
Characteristics

As a matter of some interest, insofar as we know, there is not a single in¬
stance where Indians asked to have a treaty made. Surely, the Osages never
initiated a treaty. Euro-Americans were the ones who desired to have trea¬
ties made. Thus, we may assume, if our observations are correct, that it was
the Euro-Americans who desired to obtain something.

Throughout the history of Indian treaty-making, the acquisition of land
areas was the single most important motive for making Indian treaties. The
other motives were to maintain peace, to retain loyalty, to secure right of
passage, to adjust previous treaties, and to provide for payment of claims. All
these were related in one way or another to the cession of lands. Thus, it is
difficult to classify Indian treaties by motive alone.

A cursory survey of Indian treaties shows that most of them tend to have
been made in clusters. Classical examples of this are shown by tracing the
treaties made with the Osages. The first Osage treaty with Americans was
in 1808. This was primarily a land cession treaty with secondary peace and
loyalty provisions. Peace and loyalty were elements in a whole series of trea-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

End of Indian Treaty-Making / 295

ties with the nations west of the Mississippi made at this time due to the
Louisiana Purchase. The Osage land cessions of 1808 had a direct bearing on
a series of removal treaties made with the Northeastern and Southeastern
nations.

The Osage Treaty of 1815 was only one of many treaties made because
of the War of 1812. This was to reestablish the sovereignty of the United
States over the nations involved. In 1819, we find a land cession combined
with claims. A whole series of adjustments such as this were made with
other nations at this same time. Apparently, a treaty with one of the nations
affected other nations and necessitated a series of adjustment treaties.

Another series of treaties were generated by a change in governmental
policy. This was the abandonment of the government trading factory sys¬
tem. Closing of Fort Osage would have violated the Treaty of 1808. Thus,
the Osage Treaty of 1823 was necessary to adjust the abandonment of the
Fort Osage factory.

Pressure from the advancing Euro-American frontier had generated a de¬
mand for the removal of the Northeastern nations. Thus, the ripple effect of
the advancing frontier touched the Osages. The Treaty of 1825 was a major
land cession treaty with all the other elements included. It was a part of the
greatest cluster of treaties in the history of Indian treaty-making. A second
Osage treaty of 1825 was necessary because of the opening of the Santa Fe
Trail. This Council Grove Treaty was also one of a series negotiated with
various Indian nations so the Santa Fe Trail could be protected. This brings
us to the Treaty of 1839, which was another in a series of interim adjust¬
ment treaties.

The outbreak of the Civil War caused a series of treaties to be negotiated
with the Confederacy. Among these was the Confederate Treaty made with
the White Hair and Claremore bands. After the war, another series of peace
and loyalty treaties were made. At Little Rock, Arkansas, the Osages signed
such a treaty. This was followed by many reconstruction treaties among the
five nations.

Osages

We have now returned to the Treaty of 1865. This and the unratified Drum
Creek Treaty of 1868 were in a series of Indian removals from Kansas by
treaty. For the first time, the Osages were in direct contact with the Euro-
American frontier line. Thus, they were in this series removed from the
white man’s path for the first time.

From the above sketch, it becomes apparent that Indian treaty-making
can be organized by events in the expansion of the United States. By the
same token, it is evident that a close relationship between Indian compac-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

296 / End of Indian Treaty-Making

tion and Euro-American expansion existed. That is, as the Euro-American
culture expanded into a larger and larger area, the American Indian cultures
were squeezed into a smaller and smaller area.

Anna Abel mentions an excellent way of organizing land cession treaties:
“[I]n practice, there have been several ways of extinguishing the reservation
title—by direct cession in fee to the general government for a consideration,
by cession in trust, by direct sales to individuals or to corporations, by con¬
ditional grants in severalty, by patents without restrictions, and by preemp¬
tion of lands already occupied by settlers. All have, however, resulted in re¬
moval, and the departure of the Osages was a very fitting close to the story
of Indian colonization west of the Missouri river.” 4 We have pointed out
the matter of organizing Indian treaties for two reasons. First, it provided a
way to trace a subject that has received very little attention in Indian litera¬
ture. Secondly, with fond hopes, we would like to see someone eventually
pursue this subject of Indian treaties in its many aspects.

With this said, it is time to return to more direct Osage history. Some
excellent information can frequently be found in congressional reports. The
following is a summary of Osage-United States relationships.

The Osage Indians have had congressional attention and executive
and judicial attention as follows:

Between 1808 and 1865 10 treaties were made between the Osage
nations and the United States.

Between 1824 and the present time [July 22,1953] there have been
64 Acts of Congress enacted having to do with the Osage Indians.

More than 175 court decisions, including many in the United States
Supreme Court, have been given having to do with the rights of the
tribe. 5

We have not made an actual count, but it would be safe to assume the bulk
of acts and Supreme Court decisions were made between 1900 and 1953.
In any event, the testimony reveals an extensive relationship between the
Osage nation and the United States.

This general thought has been expressed by writers in other contexts.
Judge T. E Morrison of southeast Kansas acknowledges, “It may be truth¬
fully said that the Osage Indians have made more history and have done
more for the material advancement of the West than any other tribe of In¬
dians. They were a strong powerful war tribe and equally strong in peace.” 6
Judge Morrison had reason to make such a sweeping statement about the
Osages, for he knew them very well.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

End of Indian Treaty-Making / 297
The Final Phases of Indian Treaty-Making
Ending of Osage Empire

After tracing what he called “bad faith treaties,” another Kansan, C. E. Cory,
made this statement: “Thus disappeared the last remnant of that splendid
empire, originally the home of this powerful tribe [the Osages].” 7 Although
Cory was speaking of the vast Osage empire that existed in 1800, it is in¬
teresting to note the end of that empire seventy years later. Therefore, the
quote is fitting for the end of the Old Osage Empire and the beginning of
a New Osage Domain.

The Cherokee Tobacco Case

We have now come to the immediate causes for the end of Indian treaty¬
making. Aside from the protests of those who had vested interests, a signifi¬
cant Supreme Court decision became involved in the question of Indian
treaties. What is popularly called the Cherokee Tobacco Case became a shock¬
ing interpretation of the Constitution. Earlier we avoided a detailed exami¬
nation of the hierarchy of United States law, that is, which class of law
comes first, which is second, etc. It is precisely this matter that was decided
by the Cherokee Tobacco Case.

By treaty, the Cherokee could market tobacco products in the United
States tax free. However, Euro-American tobacco product producers argued
that this created unfair competition. Specific tax laws were then enacted,
taxing Cherokee tobacco products sold in the United States. Arguing that
treaties made under the Constitution stood equal with the Constitution as
the supreme law of the land, the Cherokees took their case to the Supreme
Court.

Evidently, the court was placed in a quandary by the validity of the
Cherokee argument. The Constitution is exceptionally clear and specific on
this point. It is so clear that it leaves little room for special interpretation.
Since the wording would not allow the desired interpretation, a special re¬
defining of the term—foreign nations—was introduced. Thus, Indian na¬
tions—which had always been considered to be foreign nations as a conven¬
ience to the United States and other Euro-American nations—were declared
to be a special class of domestic nations and, therefore, Indian treaties were
different from other treaties. This argument conveniently enabled the Su¬
preme Court to rule that Indian treaties stood below and not above acts of
Congress. As this case points out, the Constitution is only what the Supreme
Court says it is at any particular moment. In other words, we are not so
much a nation of laws as we are a nation of Supreme Court interpretations.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

298 / End of Indian Treaty-Making

Apparently, we are a nation with order and justice if our laws vary to suit
the majority or an elite minority.

While the Supreme Court has no constitutional right to interpret the
Constitution, its power to interpret the Constitution has made this an aca¬
demic question since the Civil War. 8 Such abuse of the Supreme Courts
power would not have been tolerated if the same decision had been made
against the majority culture in the same way it was made against Indians. It
has been said that the greatest danger of a democracy is in its treatment of
minorities. So long as decisions such as the Cherokee Tobacco Case are toler¬
ated by the majority, this nation cannot in truth and justice claim to be
governed by laws. Laws have no meaning unless they are applied equally
and with justice.

Surely, the elimination of Indian treaty-making stands as an indictment
of the United States. Due to the Cherokee Tobacco Decision, the treaties al¬
ready ratified were downgraded and stand as a blotch on the honor of the
United States government. Yet some congressmen complain when Indians
voice distrust, and nature groups wonder why Osages do not trust promises
made in special acts. How can one trust a government that has shown such
dishonor and repudiation of its sacred word? The answer to that question is
that despite the past evils there has been a reasonable amount of fair treat¬
ment of the Osages since 1900. Like it or not, trust it or not, the United
States government is what we have, and the alternatives are far worse.

Osage Reactions

The various Indian nations reacted to the end of Indian treaty-making and
its companion, the Cherokee Tobacco Case, in different ways. Osage reactions
ranged from anger to reluctant acceptance. However, such high-handed
treatment caused the remaining shreds of Osage pride in their culture and
accomplishments to solidify into a determination to save the remnants of
the past. Thus, the Osages resisted with great determination the efforts to
force them to abandon their ways and accept what the white man wanted
them to be. This is probably why they have managed to save much of their
past.

It is with pride that Osages can say, “We have saved some of our culture.”
An interesting facet of this struggle to save a people and a culture is the role
that the Kansas land sales money, grass lease money, and oil money played.
How strange the ways of Euro-Americans are. When the Osages were
moneyless, they were dirty ignorant savages. After they got the land and
grass lease money, they became the “richest pagans on earth.” Yet it is dif¬
ficult for the Euro-American mind to separate the possession of money
from success. The possession of money brought the Osages a release from the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

End of Indian Treaty-Making / 299

constant pressure to become an Indian edition of a Euro-American. We will
see this transformation in later chapters. We will also see the Osage person
emerge as a unique member of American society.

The End of Indian Treaties

The end of Indian treaty-making was a shift to modern Indian policy and
a separation of the past and present. It comes almost as a shock to read the
short passage of the enactment of this turning point: “ Provided, That here¬
after no Indian nation or tribe within the territory of the United States
shall be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe, or
power with whom the United States may contract by treaty: Provided, fur¬
ther, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to invalidate or im¬
pair the obligation of any treaty heretofore lawfully made and ratified with
any such Indian nation or tribe.” 9 This momentous act was attached to the
Indian Appropriation Bill of March 3, 1871.

If the Osages were not the first Indian nation to come under the new
changed policy, they were among the first. Certainly, the Act of July 15,
1869, by which Congress set aside a reserve for the Osages in Indian Terri¬
tory, was a step in a new direction. 1 " On July 15, 1870, $50,000 was appro¬
priated as a loan to the Osages to assist them in the removal from Kansas. 11
In the same act that ended Indian treaty-making, March 3, 1871, Congress
included a provision to allow Osage mixed-bloods to remain in Kansas. 12
The Executive order of March 27, 1871, which set aside a tract selected by
the Osages as their new reserve, was also an action within the changed pol¬
icy. 13 Then, on May 18, 1872, Congress reaffirmed the $50,000 loan for re¬
moval made in 1870. 14 Finally, on June 15, 1872, the present reservation was
confirmed to the Osages. 15 Since these acts and actions were made and taken
before, during, and shortly after the elimination of treaty-making, the Osages
were among the first to come under the new policy.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Drum Creek Treaty

INTRODUCTION

While we have discussed the end of Indian treaty-making, we have not
carefully examined the treaty that caused it. The Drum Creek Treaty (also
called the Sturges Treaty, or Treaty of 1868) was never ratified because of
widespread vocal opposition to it. Those who wished to end Indian treaty¬
making were not the only people opposing the treaty.

In the fall of 1867, Thomas Murphy, who was Superintendent of Indian
Affairs at Atchison, Kansas, suggested to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs
that an Osage treaty was needed. He argued that intruders had already en¬
tered the reserve for several miles on the east side. Since these intruders
ignored the Osage Agent, it would be necessary to either remove the intrud¬
ers with troops or to remove the Osages. Furthermore, the state government
of Kansas was supplying the intruders with arms and ammunition. 1 So if
the Osages dared to oppose the stealing of their reserve, the settlers and the
militia were prepared to battle with them.

This communication set the stage for negotiating the largest land sale in
the history of the United States government, had the treaty been ratified.
Not only would it have been the largest single tract sale in American history
except for some waste lands, but it would have been the lowest price ever
paid. There can be no doubt that twenty cents an acre for desirable, arable
land was a real estate bargain without equal. 2

A lot of maneuvering was taking place behind the scene. Certainly, nei¬
ther the Osages, the general public, nor anyone outside the “railroad ring”
was consulted.

Little White Hair (Wa Sop pe [Black Bear]), the last of the White Hair
Chiefs, had become the principal Osage chief despite his poor health. He
refused to participate in the Drum Creek Treaty at first saying, “I have no
land to sell.” 3 It may be that he was too ill to be effective, since he died

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 301

shortly after the treaty council ended. Yet, in view of the position of other
leaders, it is likely that he did not have any land he would willingly sell. It
is probable that had Little White Hair been in good health, the Drum Creek
Treaty would not have been negotiated. Without an acknowledged and ef¬
fective leader, the headmen were disunited and unorganized. Under these
conditions, the Osages were easy prey for the railroad vultures.

Later events clearly show Osage opposition to the Drum Creek Treaty.
However, the intruder problem placed a great strain on the Osage determi¬
nation not to war on Americans. Isaac T. Gibson, the Osage agent, noted in
the winter of 1870 that there was danger of an Osage outbreak against the
intruders. 4 By this time, the Society of the Little Old Men had all but dis¬
appeared. However, the counsel of the few remaining members still com¬
manded respect. Thus, the chiefs held their brash young men in check, and
the Osages sought only to place distance between themselves and the in¬
truders.

The situation had become a mixture of agreement and cross purposes.
Both the intruders/railroads on one side and the Osages on the other wanted
the Osages out of Kansas. However, their motives for and the manner of
removal conflicted. It was in these cross purposes that the Osage removal
became especially interesting.

NEGOTIATION OF THE TREATY
Osage Reluctance

A key point has been determined through analysis of the speeches made by
the Osages at the Drum Creek Council. The point is that the Osages op¬
posed making any new treaty until the errors in the Treaty of 1865 were
corrected. 5 These errors were in reference to the “civilization fund” inter¬
pretation derived from the Treaty of 1865. Forked Horn was the only Osage
who spoke directly to this point, stating, “They do not wish their chiefs to
make any such treaty as they have made, and when you hand out the pen
he don’t want them to touch it.” 6 Thus, it is evident both from the discus¬
sion of the Treaty of 1865 and the sole direct speech to the Drum Creek
proposals that the Osages did not intend to make a new treaty.

The Osage speakers are listed as, “Twelve o’clock, Chetopah (Tze To pa
[Four Lodges]), Hard Rope, No-pa-wah-la (No pa Walla [Thunder Fear]),
Big Elk (O pon Tun ka), Wah-ti-um-ka (probably Wa ti An ka [Dry Plume]),
Kou-e-ce-gla (unidentified), Wa-ho-ta-she (probably Loud Clear Voice),
Drum, White Hair, Forked Horn, No-kah-kah-he (unidentified), and one
other.” 7

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

302 / Drum Creek Treaty
Threats and Bribes

The Commissioner of Indian Affairs led the negotiations for the United
States—but for the benefit of the railroad and not the Osages. According to
him, all the past wrongs could be corrected in this new treaty. Furthermore,
this treaty would provide the necessities for many years and would give
them a new reserve for only fifteen cents an acre. Seeing that the milk and
honey promises were not appealing to the Osages, the Commissioner shifted
to threats. These ranged from threats to cut off provisions to threats to un¬
leash the Plains nations and allow them to make unrestricted warfare against
the Osages.

Surely, the Commissioner was not well acquainted with the Osages. They
had no fear of the Plains nations; however, they would have missed the pro¬
visions, which they desperately needed. These provisions enabled the Osages
to successfully combat the other Plains nations. The loss of provisions would
have been a serious handicap for the Osages.

As the time to end the Drum Creek Council neared, it became evident
that the Osages were not going to sign the treaty. To prevent certain defeat,
a further consideration of the treaty was obtained by a variant of the “di¬
vide and conquer” maxim. Although it was an exceptional revolution in
Osage government, a committee of twelve Osage councillors and braves
was created. The Osages were induced to allow this committee to either
reject or accept the treaty. 8 But even this ploy failed, since the Committee
of Twelve only offered to sell another strip from the Diminished Reserve.

At this point, Joe Pawnee No Pa she (Not Afraid of the Pawnee) drove
home some significant points about Osage treaties and Indian treaties in
general. He pointed out the futility of these treaties. Among the reasons for
this were that provisions for protection were canceled by threats to leave
them unprotected and that instead of removing intruders as promised in
treaties, they came for more land. 9 The records support Joe s speech; he spoke
the truth.

Chicanery

Why the Osages eventually signed the treaty is difficult to determine. While
there are many irregularities in the X-mark signatures, most Osage leaders
evidently signed the treaty. We must look for the extraordinary instead of
the mundane for the reason they signed, because the Osages would not have
signed under ordinary conditions.

We can only suspect that an unusual pressure was placed upon the Osages
to obtain their assent to the Drum Creek Treaty. Surely, such an opportunity

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 303

was present at an opportune moment. Bribes had been offered to key chiefs
and even to Fr. Schonmakers. However, these were either refused or did not
obtain the desired results. It is a fact of human existence that when all else
does not bring people to a desired action, rumors have a way of getting the
job done.

In looking back, it seems evident that rumors of an Osage massacre were
influential in obtaining their assent to the treaty. It seems that two brothers
had been hunting on the Walnut River near present-day Arkansas City,
Kansas. The Osages reportedly killed one brother. Arriving at the stalemated
Drum Creek Council, the other brother gave a dramatic tearful report of
the alleged murder to the Commissioner.

If it was a fabrication, and it probably was, it was concocted by someone
who knew the Osages very well. The Osages present had no way of know¬
ing if the story was true or false. However, they were fully aware that anyone
hunting without permission on Osage lands that far from Euro-American
settlements were very likely to be killed by the Moh Short Ah ke ta (Protec¬
tors of the Land). With this possibility in mind, the Osages assumed the
rumor was true.

Surely, the Commissioner made full use of the rumor, for he declared the
Osage councillors and chiefs to be his prisoners. Declaring their lands to be
forfeited, he graciously offered them a way out. They could sign the treaty
and turn the murderer over to him and the incident would be closed. If they
refused, they would remain in arrest and the mob of intruders would likely
kill them. 10 Faced with these choices, the Osages signed the treaty on May
27, 1868. The Osage who was given as hostage for this alleged crime es¬
caped. In retrospect it is apparent that if such a murder had occurred, the
incident would not have been dropped so abruptly.

OPPOSITION GROUPS
The State of Kansas

Kansas experienced one of the longest and hottest land contests in Ameri¬
can history over the Osage Ceded Lands. The contest had fully aroused the
people of the state by 1869. Thus, when news of the provisions in the Drum
Creek Treaty became known, a groundswell of protest caused the Kansas
government to launch a campaign of protest to the national government.

The Governor, the legislature, and other state officers protested the treaty.
However, the most effective protest in the state government came from the
Superintendent of Public Instruction. Having been excluded from sections
16 and 36 in the Ceded Lands, the Superintendent wanted to be sure the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

304 / Drum Creek Treaty

school land grant was not omitted in the Drum Creek Treaty. However, he
was horrified to discover while at Drum Creek that the treaty contained no
grants for the Kansas schools. 11

Loss of sections 16 and 36 was more than the loss of land area. It meant
that the total burden for school support would fall on the taxpayer. Since
unsold railroad lands in Kansas were customarily kept off the tax rolls, this
placed the full burden of school support on the shoulders of the individual
property owners.

One can fully appreciate the storm of protest this generated among Kan¬
sas citizens once they understood what was involved. They understood the
matter quickly, for the Superintendent soon got the word to the people
by way of each County Superintendent of Public Schools. Senators were
quickly buried in an avalanche of protest from Kansas citizens.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties in Kansas adopted resolu¬
tions of protest to the Drum Creek Treaty at their state conventions. 12 Thus
there was a unified wall of protest from voters, political leaders, state of¬
ficials, and state legislators. While all these were important, the latter was
especially important since they elected the Kansas senators. There was no
way the Kansas senators could avoid answering the demands of the state
legislature. While they still supported the Drum Creek Treaty, they did get
it amended to include school land grants, which removed much of the state
pressure on the senators.

In this protest by the state of Kansas, no concern is shown for the Osages.
All of the Euro-Americans were protesting out of greed for Osage lands.
During the early stages of protest, the Osages had no effective voice speak¬
ing on their behalf to insure justice.

Osage Opposition

The terrible disunity of the Osage people is evident in the on and off sup¬
port of the Drum Creek Treaty. Like most of the Indian nations, the Osages
became more disunified as their associations with Euro-Americans became
closer and more frequent. In some respects, the degree of Westernization
bore a direct relationship to the amount of disunity. Early in 1869, one of
these changes in support of the Drum Creek Treaty was reported.

Demonstrating a change of mind, the Osages asked that the treaty be
ratified. Their reason for changing their minds was the fear of being dispos¬
sessed and, thus, having no home. The intruders were swarming into the
reserve in such numbers that this fear was not without some justification. At
the same time, the Osages asked that those intruders occupying the village
sites be removed. 13

By June, the Osages made another switch back to opposing ratification

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 305

of the Drum Creek Treaty. This protest was signed at Alexander Beyett’s
post on the Elk River about eight miles north of Independence, Kansas.
While there were not many signatures, those signing were the main leaders
of the Osages. Among the ten signers were Little White Hair, Hard Rope,
Nopawalla, Chetopa, and Little Beaver. 14 Their reasons for protest were that
the treaty did not represent the wishes of the majority of the Osage people.
Furthermore, they pointed out that the treaty was obtained by threats and
false promises. One of the obvious false promises was that the Osages could
remain in Kansas for four or five years. Another promise was that the “Civi¬
lization Fund” error would be corrected. The concluding argument was that
the lawful interpreter was replaced by an irresponsible interpreter. In con¬
clusion, the Osages stated, “We are sorry we did it. We do not want you to
ratify it.” 15

Opposition in the House of Representatives
House Versus Senate

Over a period of time, the Congress had evolved a public land policy that
had originated in the Northwest Ordinance of 1785 and had been liberal¬
ized in 1862. Between 1864 and 1870, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, with
the help of railroad interests, had developed a way to bypass the congres¬
sional land policies that had been so carefully crafted. This involved sale of
Indian lands by treaty. Since senators were not elected by a popular vote, as
Representatives were, they were easier to bribe. Thus, money became the
power to control Indian land sales.

Customarily, the Office of Indian Affairs did not release information
about pending treaties. The Senate always conducted treaty ratification de¬
bates in a closed session. Therefore, most treaties with Indians did not be¬
come public knowledge until after the treaty was ratified. 16 In fairness to
the American citizens, it should be noted that they had no opportunity to
protest these treaties until they had been ratified. Thus, an Euro-American
protest that could have been favorable to the Indian was lost “like a whistle
into the wind.”

Such practices did not escape the attention of the House of Represen¬
tatives. A joint resolution was introduced into the House which noted that
the Drum Creek Treaty was “in contravention of the laws and policy of the
United States affecting the public domain.” 17 Another resolution requested
the executive department to send copies of all documents relating to the
Drum Creek Treaty to the House. This action upset the timetable of the
pro-treaty forces by forcing exposure of the treaty to public scrutiny before
the Senate could ratify it. 18

Some sense of the House s feeling about the Drum Creek Treaty can be

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

306 / Drum Creek Treaty

gained from a House address by Representative Sidney Clarke of Kansas: “It
is clearly within our power to enter a protest against ratification of this
treaty on behalf of the United States; and to say to the Senate that if this
remarkable treaty is ratified by that body we will not make the appropria¬
tion to carry it out, and will not recognize its validity.” 19

This address may lead one to believe that the Drum Creek Treaty was the
sole basis for challenging the treaty-making power of the Senate. This was
not the case, as is shown by the report of the House Investigating Commit¬
tee: “Sir, for myself I intend never to give my consent to allowing the
treaty-making power to add to or diminish the domain of this country. It
has no power either to cede away the state of Maine to Great Britain or to
acquire new territory on the Northwest, or to exercise exclusive control of
the House of Representatives over the limits of this country either to con¬
tract or enlarge them.” 20

The allusion to ceding the state of Maine to the British is probably a
reference to the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842. After some years of dis¬
pute over the Maine-Canadian boundary, it was settled by compromise.
Great Britain was ceded 5,000 of the 12,000 square miles in dispute. Around
1865, maps were found which supported the American claim to all 12,000
square miles of the disputed area, hence the remark about ceding away
Maine.

Mention of the new territory on the Northwest was a definite reference
to the Alaska Purchase Treaty of 1867. There was heavy opposition to the
Alaska purchase among American citizens. While these objections were pri¬
marily due to ignorance and were overcome by education about Alaska, the
House was opposed for other reasons. For a time, the entire purchase was
endangered because the Senate had obligated the nation to pay $7,200,000
without consulting the House. The House concurred in the treaty only to
preserve the honor of the United States and to preserve relations with Rus¬
sia. 21 Thus the Osage Drum Creek Treaty was the first real opportunity for
the House to limit the Senates treaty-making power.

Osages: The Ignored Factor

Representative Sidney Clarke was responsible for again suggesting that the
House control treaty-making by refusing to provide the necessary funds.
However, it is doubtful this was his purpose in opposing the Drum Creek
Treaty. Clarke met with representatives of the White Hair, Little Osage, and
Big Hill bands. Black Dog and Claremore had not yet brought their bands
in from the spring hunt of 1869. Two reasons for his opposition to the Drum
Creek Treaty were given to this council. First, Clarke said he thought the
Osages were being cheated. Secondly, he said if they wanted to sell their

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 307

land, they should sell to the government so it could be sold directly to the
settlers. 22

The Osages had absolutely no interest in who ultimately bought their
lands. But selling to the government made sense to them. Clarke was evi¬
dently being candid with them, because he must have known that the
Osages had good reason not to accommodate settlers. By the same token, he
must have known that the Osages needed the intruders to defeat the treaty.
Surely, Clarke s support of later amendments to the treaty clearly shows he
was more interested in fairness to the settlers and the state of Kansas than
he was about the effect on the Osages.

With a few notable exceptions, objections to the Drum Creek Treaty in
the House, state of Kansas, or among American citizens were made without
any consideration of the Osages. The House was opposed primarily because
the treaty usurped power the House felt belonged to them. Kansas govern¬
ment was mainly opposed to the treaty because it did not include a grant
of school lands. Most citizens were opposed to the treaty because it made
the land too expensive for the settler. No effective group was opposed to
the treaty because it was unfair to the Osages. Certainly, the Office of In¬
dian Affairs did not honor their trust position and defend the Osages since
they were backing the railroad position.

The battle in the House over the Drum Creek Treaty ended on March 3,
1871. In an obscure rider to the Indian appropriation bill, treaty-making
with Indians was ended. “ Provided, That hereafter no Indian nation or tribe
within the territory of the United States shall be acknowledged or recog¬
nized as an independent nation, tribe, or power with whom the United
States may contract by treaty: Provided, further, That nothing herein con¬
tained shall be construed to invalidate or impair the obligation of any treaty
heretofore lawfully made and ratified with any such Indian nation or tribe.” 23

Any Indian reading the last proviso would have some cause for concern,
in view of Indian history. On the surface, this seems to affirm all preceding
Indian treaties. However, one must wonder how “lawfully made and ratified”
would be interpreted when an old treaty stands in the way of a government
project or the desires of the majority. Would it be interpreted as a rule of
law or as a rule of men?

Intruder Opposition

The Kansas intruder problem is said to have originated on the Delaware
reserve. In succession, the intruders evolved new techniques on the New
York, Iowa, Cherokee, Shawnee, and Potawatomi reserves. By the time a
severe intruder problem reached the Osage reserves, the intruders had be¬
come especially effective at ousting the Indian from their reserves. 24 This is

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

308 / Drum Creek Treaty

not to say that the Osages did not have any problems with intruders before
1865. It is to say that the intruders did not make any serious effort to oust
the Osages from the Kansas reserves until 1865.

As a matter of fact, there were three waves of intruders into the Kansas
reserve of the Osages. The first of these were motivated by the slavery con¬
troversy in Kansas. A second invasion consisted of Union veterans of the
Civil War. They went to war as boys and entered the reservation as battle-
hardened, poor men. Some of the third invasion came as the Osages were
leaving Kansas. Nearly all these were settlers who bought their land and by
virtue of this fact were not intruders. However, the first of these had re¬
sponded to news of the imminent departure of the Osages and had intruded
to preempt choice lands. 25

Each of these waves had different types of people. Mingled with the first
two waves were the typical woodsys of the earlier frontiers. This fact alone
indicates that the Kansas frontier was different from the earlier frontiers. It
was not only the Osages, Kaw, and emigrant Indians compacted athwart the
path of the western movement that made the Kansas frontier so different.
The Kansas-Nebraska Bill and the ensuing conflict in Kansas was positively
something new in frontier history. A pent up demand for land had built up
during the Civil War. Young men who would have moved west in the nor¬
mal sequence were at war. In the turmoil of the post-war period, there were
a vast number of displaced persons. Thus, as never before in frontier history,
a large body of poor, battle-hardened young men was available to advance
the American frontier.

It would seem obvious that the character of the people in these three
waves was different from that of the earlier frontiers. The first wave con¬
sisted of highly opinionated, intolerant, and idealistic people. These traits
were unusual on earlier frontiers. Men of the second wave had not been able
to accumulate any worldly goods, as previous generations had been able to
do. Yet they had their war experiences and were accustomed to settling dif¬
ferences with violence, if peaceful means did not produce immediate results.
In my childhood, they were called “sudden men.” While the third wave was
comparable to Turner’s equipment farmer, it differed in the character of the
people involved. 26 Like the two preceding waves, these people were prod¬
ucts of the Civil War era. Because of their strong sense of defending their
government, they did not hesitate to demand support from that government
even if their demands were contrary to the rule of law and justice.

The rapidity of intrusion was enough to alarm anyone. In three years,
between 1867 and 1870, over a thousand intruders moved into the eastern
part of the Osage Diminished Reserve. 27 Many more had entered the north¬
ern part as far west as Wichita, Kansas. Montgomery County on the east had

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 309

a population of 8,000 intruders by March of 1870. 28 In 1867, the spring
wave of intruders was so alarming that the Osage agent requested a mili¬
tary force to turn them back. 29 Certainly, one group of intruders was a
special embarrassment to Agent Isaac Gibson. These were Quakers who set¬
tled southwest of Independence, Kansas. This same area was the setting for
Laura Ingalls Wilder’s Little House on the Prairie.

GROWING POWER OF THE INTRUDERS
Power of Organizations

Mark Twain once commented, “Wherever two Americans meet, one of
them is sure to get a gavel and call the other one to order.” This was surely
true of the intruders on the Osage Diminished Reserve. They were well
organized into active, effective organizations. Supported by these local or¬
ganizations and the Kansas state government, the intruders became increas¬
ingly bold.

Isaac Gibson, the Osage agent, feared the intruders were trying to pro¬
voke the Osages into an attack. In their combined strength, it was possible
that given the excuse of an Osage attack no matter how justified, the in¬
truders could have destroyed the Osage people. Their boldness and disregard
for national laws are well illustrated by the fact that a village belonging
to 900 Osages was destroyed by plundering intruders. 30 The intruders pre¬
ferred these village sites because the fields were cleared, the underbrush was
cut away, and the locations were well supplied with water.

Some idea of the intruders’ organizations can be gained if we realize they
held meetings both within and outside the Diminished Reserve. These
meetings, wherever they were held, featured a speaker who might have been
their Washington delegate, a Kansas official, or a congressman. In every case,
the speaker managed to inflame the intruders to commit greater atrocities.
Goaded by each other, intruders appropriated the Osage cornfields for their
use and even forbad the Osages the right to cut wood on the stolen claims. 31

Independence, Kansas, traces its origins to early 1869 when forty families
settled there. At first, the community was called Hay Town because the
houses were made of grass. Even the Osages called the settlement Pa she To
wan or Hay Town. Certainly, Independence and Montgomery County were
illegal, since they were both organized and recognized by the state of Kan¬
sas before the Osage title was extinguished.

State Government Support

It appears that more than enough intruders were upon the Diminished Re¬
serve. However, Governor Crawford, speaking for Kansas, declared: “Kansas

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

310 / Drum Creek Treaty

cannot afford to remain idle while other states are using every honorable
means in their power to encourage immigrants to settle within their bor¬
ders. The immigration for 1867 was fifty thousand, and it should have been
one hundred thousand.” 32 These were words backed by action. In addition
to advertising Kansas land opportunities in every conceivable way, Craw¬
ford also took steps to “protect” the intruders.

He organized four companies of militia around the eastern and northern
boundaries of the Diminished Reserve. Although it was reported that the
Osages were preparing for war, this was a false rumor. The intruders were
not the threatened people. In a very real sense, however, the Osages were
truly threatened. Faced with the fact that they were caught between the
horns of the dilemma, the Osages spent as much time as possible out on the
Plains and kept the peace. 33 Fortunately for the Osages, federal troops ar¬
rived in time to aid their determination to keep the peace and real threats
did not again arise until 1870. Yet, more of the Osage property was still
being taken.

Most of the mixed-bloods, as well as the very old and very young Osages,
remained on their claims or in their villages when the Osages went to the
Plains for the hunt. These, in their helpless position, were powerless to stop
the intruder thefts and depredations. They were also the ones who suffered
the insults and atrocities inflicted by the intruders. It was a wry turn of his¬
tory that made the Osages, who had made the greatest progress toward ac¬
cepting the Euro-American culture, bear the brunt of that culture s malice.

Sections Twelve and Thirteen

While the battle for ratification of the Drum Creek Treaty was on its death¬
bed, $50,000 for removal expenses was appropriated as a loan to the Osages.
However, to receive the loan the Osages had to agree to accept Sections
Twelve and Thirteen of the Appropriation Act. Aside from the donation of
school lands and other gifts, these sections also set the “across the board”
price of $1.25 an acre for the Osage lands.

This requirement especially upset the mixed-bloods. Most of the mixed-
bloods had lost the fruits of their labor when they were forced to cede their
“improvements” on the Neosho River by the Treaty of 1865. Now, five years
later, after building new cabins, barns, and fences, plus again clearing and
breaking out new land on the Verdigris River, they were again being re¬
quired to walk away from their hard labor without adequate compensation.
Their lands were modestly estimated to be worth eleven or twelve dollars
an acre, but this did not include the value of their improvements.

To get support for Sections Twelve and Thirteen of the Act of July 15,
1870, the Commissioners agreed to do “everything within their power,” to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 311

force the intruders to honor the following agreement: “The community of
settlers agreed to guarantee to the mixed-bloods full protection in their
rights to enter their claims as white settlers, should they desire to remain
upon them, and if not of selling them, and extending to the purchaser of
such Indian claims the same protection in their rights to enter.” 34

This agreement was a premeditated hoax. The ink was not dry on Osage
signatures affixed to the acceptance of the Indian Appropriation Act before
the “community agreement” was violated. Property of the mixed-bloods
was destroyed or stolen. Barns, corn cribs, fence rails, and standing crops
were burned; livestock was either run off or stolen. The Commissioners
made a few token gestures to stop the damage and harassment, but their
pledges of good faith had the force of a dying wind. 35

THE VANN-ADAIR AFFAIR
The Beginning

It might be supposed that the defeat of the Drum Creek Treaty and final
removal of the Osages from Kansas would be the end of the Osage involve¬
ment with the treaty. Such a supposition would be far from the truth. For
almost fifty years after the defeat of the Drum Creek Treaty, it caused the
Osages a great deal of trouble. The problem started innocently enough, but
as so often happens, innocence can quickly become a harsh taskmaster.

According to W P. Mathes, 36 in November of 1869, six Osages asked him
to act as interpreter with the Cherokee. These Osages were from Big Chiefs
and Black Dog’s bands and represented only these two bands. The an¬
nounced purpose of the discussion was to purchase a new reservation from
the Cherokee. However, the Osages were escorted to a room for a confer¬
ence with Clement N. Vann, William P. Adair, and Cornelius Boudinot, who
were Cherokee mixed-bloods.

The gist of the discussion was that these three offered to try to get the
Osages more money for their Kansas lands than the eighteen cents an acre
offered in the Drum Creek Treaty. Their fee was to be half of everything
over ten cents an acre above the Drum Creek Treaty offer. Since the three
were going to Washington, they would need a power of attorney to act on
behalf of the Osages. 37

While some documents of this arrangement had existed before February
8,1873, it was a written contract of that date which became the basis of the
Vann-Adair claim. This document set the total fee due Vann and Adair at
$330,000 for services rendered. It should be noted that Boudinot had dropped
out of the affair. He stated that when the three arrived in Washington, the
Drum Creek Treaty was already all but dead. Thus, there could be no fee

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

312 / Drum Creek Treaty

since no service had been performed. It must have taken a great exertion of
their egos for Vann and Adair to persist in their claim.

Fateful Annuity Payment

The June Annuity Payment of 1873 had several interesting events associated
with it. The Wichita chief Isadawah was very popular among the Plains na¬
tions. An Osage mourning party had slain the Wichita chief and the Plains
nations were bent on revenging his death unless the Osages paid a suitable
atonement for the murder. The council with the Wichitas was being held
during this payment. If this was not enough to put the Osages in hot water,
another mourning party supplied additional fuel. A white man had been
killed on the Plains and two U.S. Marshals were at the Agency to arrest the
guilty Osages. 38

This situation was tailor-made for Vann and Adair. Feeding upon the fears
from these threats to the Osages, they managed to get the Osage Council to
approve the February 1873 contract. In return, they promised to save the
Osages who might be punished for the two murders. Bribes were offered
to Council members, but it is doubtful if any of the Osage leaders know¬
ingly took the bribes. It seems more likely that the Council misunderstood
the amount of the claim, thinking it was $3,300 or $33,000 instead of
$330,000. 39 The Osage language does not lend itself to accurate compre¬
hension of amounts over 1,000.

We are not sure the Osages were unduly disturbed by either of the mur¬
ders. There was certainly concern about the Wichita refusal to accept the
atonement offers of the Osages. However, Joe Pawnee No Pa she settled this
matter rather curtly as a Council officer:

There have been many words. Wichitas have sent many words from
their tongues; they have said little. Osages have talked like blackbirds
in spring; nothing has come from their hearts. When Osages talk this
way, Wichitas believe they are talkers like blackbird. I have listened
long time to this talk of blackbirds, and I said when my people talk
like blackbirds, Wichitas think they are women. I want to say few words,
then Wichitas can go to their lodges and mourn for their chief. I want
Wichitas to know this thing. I want them to know that Osage are
great warriors. Today they have talked like women but they are war¬
riors. They have those things which Wah’ Kon-Tah gave to men, so
that he could tell them from women. They know how to die in battle.

I want Wichitas to know this thing. We will give ponies to Wichitas
for this Chief, then they can go home to their lodges. I have spoken. 4 "

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Drum Creek Treaty / 313
An Authorized Payment of Fee

Considering the known facts, it is somewhat difficult to explain how the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs could justify payment of any amount to
Vann and Adair. Surely, Osage Agent Isaac Gibson and Superintendent
Enoch Hoag were opposed to any payment. The Board of Indian Commis¬
sioners was also against any payment to them. Yet, despite this opposition
from those in the best position to judge the evidence in the Vann-Adair case,
$50,000 of Osage money was given to Vann and Adair by the Indian Office. 41

The Commissioners Report of 1873 contains Gibsons account of the
Vann-Adair affair. In this report, Gibson accurately identifies the real sup¬
porters of the Osages: “The act referred to was a part of the Indian appro¬
priation Bill, passed July 15, 1870, having the approval of the President, his
board of Indian commissioners, Secretary of the Interior, Commissioner of
Indian Affairs, the chairmen of the Senate and House Committees on In¬
dian Affairs, and all of the leading men in Congress, and all the philan¬
thropic and earnest friends of the Indians, because it was an act of justice,
plain and uncovered, requiring no corrupting influence to make for it hope¬
ful and constant supporters.” 42

Gibson was referring to the defeat of the Drum Creek Treaty. He goes
on to report that when he ordered Vann and Adair to cease bothering the
Osage chiefs, they threatened him. Yet, the Indian Office made a donation
of $50,000 of Osage money to Vann and Adair.

One would be inclined to believe that having received $50,000 as pay¬
ment in full for any possible service would have settled the Vann-Adair
claim for all time. Like this whole affair, reason would prove to be a poor
guide to what actually happened. For example, no miracle of a reasoning
mind could ever conceive that Samuel J. Crawford, the ex-governor of Kan¬
sas who so bitterly oppressed them in Kansas, would defend the Osages in
the later Vann-Adair case. 43

On May 2,1910, the long drawn-out Vann-Adair Affair and the aftermath
of the Drum Creek Treaty was all but ended. The Supreme Court ruled
against the Vann-Adair heirs. The Osages for the first time in over thirty
years were free from the Vann-Adair claim. In more recent years, the Osage
nation entered a claim against the United States to recover attorney fees
incurred in an effort to defeat the Drum Creek Treaty. Thus, this infamous
treaty has clung to the Osage people into the 1980s.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

1 6

The Osage Removal

INTRODUCTION

Removals

Without a doubt, the best-known removal in United States history is Jack¬
son’s removal of the Cherokee. While the Cherokee removal was a great
injustice that caused suffering and loss of life, the Osage removal from Kan¬
sas was equally unjust, equally full of suffering, and, on a percentage basis,
equally costly in lives. However, so little has been written about these as¬
pects of the Osage removal that David Parsons, in his dissertation about the
removal, referred to the removal as a simple move with little loss of life or
suffering. Subsequent to Parsons reaching that conclusion, new evidence has
surfaced. 1

The Osage removal was not an isolated event. It was a result of a shift
in Indian policy. This change became evident after the enactment of the
Kansas-Nebraska Bill and the ensuing war in Kansas. Basically, the changed
policy was to remove all Indians from Kansas. While the Civil War delayed
the actual removal, it also provided a solution to the problem of where to
settle the Indian nations that were in Kansas reserves. By requiring the Con¬
federate Indian nations to sell portions of their Indian Territory reserves in
what is now Oklahoma, space was available to colonize the nations from the
Kansas reserves. Therefore, from 1864 to 1871 all but a few token groups of
Indians were removed from Kansas to Oklahoma.

The last Indians to be removed from Kansas were the Osages and Kaw.
The Osage removal was especially prolonged and full of hardships because
of the large size of the Osage reserve and because they were the last to be
removed. For this reason, among others, we have written about this period
in some detail.

It would be interesting to study generations by the degree of control they
have over their emotions. Surely, the Civil War generations had very little

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 315

emotional control. They tended to move from one emotional issue to an¬
other and rarely submitted their choices to reason or compromise. Thus, they
were easily aroused to violent action as a means of problem solving. The
frontier, being on the fringes of Western civilization, was probably more
inclined to violence than the more settled areas.

Earlier generations of Osages would have gone to war over the intruders
and the many abuses associated with their removal. The removal generation
of Osages was directed by the certainty of annihilation if they resisted with
violence. Thus, there was reason and compromise induced by necessity. This
great cultural difference was, to a considerable extent, a factor in the Osage
removal being especially harsh in both overt and covert abuses.

The Neosho Agency
Isaac Gibson

Changes in the Neosho Agency reflect shifts in Indian policy. In 1851, the
Neosho Agency was under the Southern Superintendency, having been
changed from the Western Superintendency. Besides the Osages, this Agency
included the Seneca-Shawnee, Seneca, Quapaw, and what was loosely called
the New York Indians. Although the Neosho Agency was supposedly changed
to the Central Superintendency in 1867, it was still listed under the South¬
ern Super intendency until the 1869-1871 report. In the spring of 1870, all
nations but the Osages were dropped from the Neosho Agency. Four years
later, the name was changed to the Osage Agency. 2

Isaac Gibson was the first agent of the new Neosho Agency organization
that included only the Osages. He was also the first of the Quaker agents.
Gibson had been appointed in 1869, which was a crucial time in the life of
the people. Under Gibsons administration, the Osages slowly moved away
from the brink of extinction. With only minor reservations we can say with
justice that Gibson was both loved and hated by the Osages.

Governmental Changes

While the people appreciated and loved Gibson for his efforts on their be¬
half, they hated him for destroying much of their culture and institutions.
Gibson set out to destroy the two tribal chieftainships. These were the two
division chiefs who presided over the gentile or tribal system. Although ear¬
lier efforts to get the Osages to accept Me ka Ki he ka (Star Chief; better
known as Joe Pawnee No Pah she, or Governor Joe) as governor had failed,
upon the death of Little White Hair ( Wa Sop pe or Black Bear) in 1869,
Gibson s choice prevailed.

The Council of Ah ke ta could not agree on who should succeed to the
White Hair Chieftainship. To complicate matters, the Ne ke A Shin ka or

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

316 / Osage Removal

Society of Little Old Men had become weak and disorganized. In effect, the
tribal system with its twenty-four clans had slowly passed away as a unify¬
ing force. Thus, Gibson was able to gain acceptance for Governor Joe.

It must be explained, however, that Joe’s acceptance was not entirely be¬
cause of Gibson, disunity, or the failure of the tribal system. One must re¬
member there were two division chiefs. The White Hair line was recognized
by all Osages as head of the Sky Division. However, only about one-third
of the Osages recognized the White Hairs as the head chief of all Osages.
This designation is a Euro-American creation and not a creation of all the
Osages. Star Chief or Governor Joe was the head chief of the Earth Divi¬
sion and was so recognized by all the Osages. His acceptance as Governor
largely was due to this fact. To the Osage mind, failure of the Council of
Ah ke ta to select a White Hair successor from the many aspirants threw the
decision upon the people, since the Little Old Men could not act in this
selection. Thus, for the first time in Osage history a head chief was selected
by the people. While this was a notable modification of Osage law, it must
be remembered that the people selected a division chief for the new office.

As we have shown in the matter of an appointive governor, in the final
analysis, it was the Osage people who selected the governor. This same pro¬
cess was at work in selecting the first appointive council. In effect, Gibson
nominated and the people, while holding a veto power, accepted the coun¬
cil. The selection of a governor and council in this manner broke forever the
power of the Ne ke A Shin ka and the Ah ke ta (Chief Protectors). Never
again would the Osages select their leaders in the traditional way, nor would
they ever again govern themselves free from outside interference. They now
possessed only a token sovereignty.

From the Euro-American view, the Osages had taken a giant step toward
becoming Westernized. Without a doubt, this was Gibson s intent. However,
many of Gibson s actions seemed to indicate that he was also grooming the
Osages for a leadership role in what was then a possible Indian State. It is
significant that the Osages were the last Indians to give up on the creation
of an Indian State. In any event, Gibson brought the Osage people from the
brink of extinction into “clear, cloudless days.” 3

Senator Lot Morrill

Another friend of the Osages was Lot Morrill of Maine. It was this Senator
Morrill that reminded the Senate of Articles Two and Sixteen of the Treaty
of 1865. Article Two fixed the price of the Osage Trust Lands at $1.25 an
acre. All subsequent removal actions including the Trust Lands had reduced
this price drastically. Article Sixteen guaranteed the Osages the same price,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 317

$1.25 an acre, for their remaining Kansas lands should they agree to remove
from Kansas. Yet, all removal proposals had included a greatly reduced price
per acre for these lands also. Morrill argued for justice to the Osages and for
the honor of the Senate. Shamed into honoring their treaty obligations, the
Senate removal bill not only included the agreed upon price of $1.25 an
acre, but it also included a payment of $30,000 due from unfulfilled provi¬
sions of the Treaty of 1839. 4

PROLONGED REMOVAL OF OSAGES

The slow progress of a removal act for the Osages was a source of irritation
to the intruders in the Osage Diminished Reserve. These intruders met in
the illegal city of Winfield, which was in the illegal County of Cowley,
Kansas. They passed a resolution that they sent to Congress urging passage
of either the House or Senate version of the Osage Removal Bill. They
expressed the need to remove the Indian title so the actual dweller upon the
land could buy the land. 5

We have ample evidence that the intruders had become so motivated by
greed that they had become emotionally unstable and a threat to the Osage.
The Lieutenant Governor of Kansas well illustrates this in a statement:
‘When Congress fails to do justice it ‘broke the law, and the people have a
right, injustice to take possession of the reservation.’ ” 6 We do not believe a
person in control of his or her emotions could be so remote from reason
and respect for the order of law.

THE REMOVAL COUNCIL
The Removal Act

The Osage Removal Act was so important to the future of the Osages that
Gibson went to Washington to exert as much influence as he could. Gibson
must be included on a list of those who aided the Osages to get as many
benefits as possible incorporated into the removal act. This bill was enacted
on July 15, 1870. 7 Gibson was delighted with the act, but he was especially
pleased with assurances that the new reservation would not cost more than
fifty cents an acre. He left Washington with this final good news from the
Secretary of the Interior. 8

Gibson was instructed to return to the Neosho Agency and to do all he
could to induce the Osages to agree to the recently enacted removal act. He
was also directed to select a place in the proposed new reserve to hold a
council for discussing and signing the act. The first instruction was rein-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

318 / Osage Removal

forced on August 11, when the Central Superintendency was told the act
would not be valid unless the Osages approved it. Pressure was to be applied
to get their approval if all else failed. 9

Insofar as the second instruction was concerned, it was the outgrowth of
the Osage failure to select a delegation to Washington. Before Gibson had
left for Washington, the Osages had requested permission for a delegation to
go to the capital to arrange for their removal. This had been approved, but
the peoples feelings of opposition to treaties made it impossible to find any
Osage delegates willing to take the unpopular step. Thus, they had requested
a commission to hold council with them on the proposed new reserve in
August. They proposed to make a short spring hunt and return to the new
reserve instead of to the old Kansas reserve. 10 So, a council was arranged to
be held in the new reserve on August 20, 1870. However, it should be ob¬
served that a meeting in the new reserve did not occur until 1871.

Convening the Council
Change in Plans

Gibson selected a site near Louis Chouteau’s post on the Big Caney for the
council. The site was sometimes called Gillstrap s crossing and it was located
between Silver Lake and the mouth of Sand Creek. A Cherokee delegation
was also to meet with the Osages at this site to discuss a price for the new
Osage reserve. All the arrangements were made on the assumption that the
Osages would accept the recent removal act. To alleviate this apparent pres¬
sure, the site was left to the Osages, and they selected the Drum Creek site
in Kansas for the 1870 council.

While everyone except the Osages were assembled and ready to hold a
council on the appointed date of August 20, the date was reset for August
29. Gibson had sent runners to call the hunting parties in, but they had not
returned by the new date of August 29. By August 31, Governor Joe and the
Big Hills had returned from the hunt. Apparently, the mixed-bloods had
arrived earlier, and the Little Osages had arrived immediately after the Big
Hills. 11 The delayed arrival and order of arrival strongly suggest the Osages
were deliberately delaying the council.

Delayed Hunts

Prolonging the spring hunt into late August would have been unusual be¬
fore i860. Corn usually entered the “milk stage” by the third week in July.
Thus, it was necessary to end the spring hunt in time to harvest “roasting
ears” to make dried corn. Most Osage corn was harvested in the “milk
stage” instead of as mature corn. However, some was harvested as mature

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 319

corn to be processed into parched corn and hominy. Due to the destruction
of Osage cornfields during the Civil War and by intruders, the Osages often
missed having a corn crop. Thus, there was no need to return from the
spring hunt in July.

Aside from a deliberate intent to delay the council or the loss of a corn
crop, there were other reasons for prolonged hunts. More and more, other
nations were invading Osage hunting territory. With so many additional
hunters present it not only required more time to find, kill, and process
buffalo, but more time was required to protect the hunters and the camps.
Between 1865 and 1870, the Osages were killing as many as ten thousand
buffalo on each of the two hunts, or at least they were trading this many
buffalo hides. Trade with other Indian nations may account for some of
these hides. However, we are referring to the total bison killed on the
Southern Plains per year. If we assume other nations were killing a like
number between the Salt Plains and the Arkansas River in Kansas, hunting
would indeed be slowed by the small size of the herds.

Possibly, the last reason was the most significant. It is noticeable that as
contact problems increased, the Osages spent more and more time on the
Plains. Out in the great openness of the Plains, the people were again free.
The worries and disturbing influences of Western civilization were forgot¬
ten as the people savored the ages-old life of their ancestors. These moments
of the past became dearer to the people as it became evident that they would
not have this last refuge from the white man for very many years. They
wanted to enjoy the last shred of the past, for they knew these days must
sustain them forever.

By September 8, the mixed bloods, Governor Joe’s Big Hills, Nopawalla,
and Chetopa of the Little Osages, including Claremore and Tally with their
bands, had arrived. We assume the White Hair bands were also present, since
Black Dog the Younger and Wa ti An Ka with the two Black Dog bands
were the only Osages absent. 12 Thus, the council opened on September 9,
1870.

The Council
Questions

The Osages had prepared a list of four questions, and these were answered
by Superintendent Enoch Hoag as soon as the opening prayers were com¬
pleted. These questions were: (1) Would the Osages be protected in their
new home? (2) Would their money be paid to them annually, or as they
wanted it? (3) Would the Osages be permitted to have their own regulations
in their new home? and (4) Could the Osages have some money appropri-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

320 / Osage Removal

ated for their removal expenses paid to them immediately? These questions
seem well considered and are directed to critical points. The questions were
probably formulated out on the Plains and prepared by Governor Joe. 13

Evidently, these questions caught Superintendent Hoag by surprise, be¬
cause his answers were evasive and provided little satisfaction to the Osages.
His answer to the first question—Would the Osages be protected in their
new home—was answered by quoting the Cherokee Treaty of 1866, Article
Twenty-seven. 14 He also read a telegram stating that troops were in the
process of removing intruders. It is probable that the telegram gave the
Osages some assurance, since for them actions were more influential than
words.

In answer to the second question about the payment of their money, the
Superintendent gave a round-about refusal to give them a voice in how
their payments would be made. This was not a satisfactory answer for the
Osages. For many years the problem of payment, both in kind and time, was
a source of friction between the Osages and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Evidently, Hoag did not want to commit the Indian service to a limitation
of their intrusion into Osage government. To avoid this he waved the “red
herring” of the right to participate in the Grand Council. This council was
probably in preparation for the creation of an Indian State. Possibly Hoag
was aware of Osage interest in such a state. In fact, Gibson seemed to be
grooming them for a leadership role in such an organization.

The fourth question was also hedged, since Hoag could not determine
when the appropriated money could be paid. Even with a set time, the Osages
would only get about one-fourth of the money. However, this could have
increased to one-half with Gibsons approval. Hoag answered that the fall
annuity and gifts would be distributed at the conclusion of the council. 15

Requested Changes

The Osages presented a written petition with what they considered to be
requested changes. Since the removal act was signed without incorporation
of the Osage requests, very few of the changes were made. This petition had
five requests: (1) A larger reservation than the 160 acres per person was re¬
quested. It was the Osage hope that the reservation could be extended to
include the Salt Plains. However, they also feared to be too closely confined
in a small area. (2) Having seen the evil effects of allotment on other Indian
people, the Osages wished to avoid forced allotment. Therefore, they asked
that they would not be forced to allot without their consent. This provision
was included in the removal act, which enabled the Osages to be the last
Indian nation in either Indian Territory or Oklahoma Territory to allot.

Of the remaining three requests, only number three was granted: (3)

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 321

This request asked that they be allowed to hunt in the Diminished Reserve
and other public lands as long as the buffalo was available. Generally, the
United States upheld this right of the Osages. Only during the Cheyenne
“War” of the 1870s were the Osages forbidden to hunt on the Plains. In the
events leading to the Cheyenne outbreak, Medicine Lodge settlers killed
some Osage buffalo hunters and the United States paid the Osages compen¬
sation for the act. (4) Intruders were on Osage minds. They did not want a
repeat of the intruder invasion following the Treaty of 1865. Seeking the
strongest possible guarantee of backing by the United States government,
they asked for a special treaty dealing with this problem. One of the reasons
they resisted Gibson’s efforts to acquire tillable lands for them was to obtain
a reservation intruders could not farm. Thus, they hoped to remove their
reservation from the greed of intruders.

The final request was avoided, but some compensation was made: (5) An
amount of land equal to the amount of school lands donated to Kansas was
requested. 16 This request made too much sense to be accepted by Congress.
A cash payment was made instead of an equal land area swap. In fairness to
Congress, it must be said that they were limited by the Cherokee Treaty of
1866 in the amount of land they could allow one Indian nation to acquire.
However, the Cherokee overreached themselves by demanding $1.25 an acre
for the Osage Reserve. The ultimate price of seventy cents an acre violated
both the Osage Treaty of 1865 and the Removal Act of 1870 which fixed
the price at no more than fifty cents an acre. To compensate for these viola¬
tions, and to justify a higher price to the Cherokee, the Osages were allowed
to acquire nearly 1,500,000 acres.

Approving the Removal Act

The Removal Act of 1870 was approved by all the Osage leaders except Wa
ti An ka on September 10, 1870. Wa ti An ka (Dry Plume or Dry Feather)
was the leader of that part of the Black Dog band that had earlier followed
Wolf. Dry Plume claimed he did not know about the council in time to get
there before the signing. It seems this was a device to emphasize a point of
importance to the Osages. In his speech at the extra session, Dry Plume
again asked that the Osages be allowed to buy land as far as the Salt Plains. 17
The fact that the various bands were so close together in their requests
clearly indicate they had held council on the Plains before they came in for
the Removal council.

The Osages often used the late arrival to emphasize a point they ardently
wished to make. As a matter of fact, this device was incorporated into the
Osage ceremonies. One clan was always late for the ceremonies. The officials
and other twenty-three clans would be assembled for the procession to the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

322 / Osage Removal

House of Mystery. Yet, all would have to wait on the slow clan, since the
ceremony could not begin without all twenty-four clans. This little drama
was played out to stress both the unity and completeness of the tribal or¬
ganization.

THE REMOVAL FUND
An Effective Weapon

The Removal Fund was in the removal act as a part of Section Twelve. A
stated purpose was to make the removal easier for the Osage people. How¬
ever, the Osages were in dire need of money because of the intruders and
the misdirection of their funds from the Ceded Lands. Thus, the $50,000
loan that was a part of Section Twelve was an effective weapon to encour¬
age the Osages to approve the Removal Act of 1870.

As it worked out, the $50,000 was a great convenience for the Bureau of
Indian Affairs. Custom dictated that gifts be given to Indians after a council.
This was especially true when one party to a council was asking for spe¬
cial concessions. Indian tradition demanded payment of a gift for any con¬
cession.

Gifts

The entire practice of gift giving was poorly understood by Euro-Americans,
since it was foreign to Western civilization. Usually, this custom at councils
was considered to be a bribe. In the early contact times, it was considered
to be a tribute. Among the Osages, gifts were tokens of thanks, a seal of
high esteem, or a gesture of respect to someone who had bestowed some¬
thing upon you. Anyone who had received a story or service from an Osage
who held proprietary rights to the story or service owed that Osage a gift.
To an Osage, the greatest indignity is to be thought of as a stingy person.
Withholding a gift is proof of the ultimate in stinginess. Even the Euro-
Americans could sense the scorn, contempt, and ill-feeling when they omit¬
ted gifts after councils in which concessions had been given to them.

The gifts given after the Removal Council were very poor in quality.
Courtesy forbad protest or holding hard feelings toward the giver of poor
gifts when it appears they are the best he can afford. However, for a person
to give poor gifts when he obviously can afford to give much better gifts
is a serious insult. Yet the Osages needed these gifts so desperately that they
were accepted with a gratitude far greater than the spirit of the giving and
the quality merited. One cannot help wondering what the reaction would
have been if the Osages had known these “gifts” had been bought with
their money. To the minds of Americans today, it not only seems bizarre to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 323

buy “gifts” for Indians with their own money but equally strange to use
Osage money to pay the expenses of the host Commissioners. One does not
need to be Osage to realize that something was terribly wrong with the
financial arrangements of the Removal Council.

Gibson did not discover the misuse of the $50,000 loan until March 9,
1871. He was horrified to discover that the “gifts,” expenses of the Removal
Council, and the cost of surveying the ninety-sixth Meridian had been paid
from the Removal Fund. His report of the expenditure gave the figure as
$11,419.43 but he was $100 over the actual costs. 18

The reason given for using the Removal Fund for these governmental
functions was that there was no other fund available for these purposes. De¬
spite careful audits, no record of the Osages being reimbursed for these ex¬
penditures has been found. However, it might have been included in a gen¬
eral settlement of claims during the 1970s. 19

THE SCHOOL LANDS
Special Provisions

Through an interpretation by the General Land Office, Indian reserves did
not constitute public domain when the Indian title was extinguished. Be¬
cause of this interpretation, Kansas was especially concerned about the
school land grants in the Osage Reserves. So, specific school land grants
were included in the Removal Act of 1870. Kansas requested that three pro¬
visions regarding the school land be a part of the act. These were: (1) To
reserve sections sixteen and thirty-six to Kansas for public school purposes;
(2) To secure equivalents in lieu thereof if these sections had been pre¬
viously committed; and (3) To secure said equivalents within the bounds of
the Osage Reserve. 2 ”

The act did not include all the state of Kansas had requested, but it did
include a school lands grant. This grant was stated in the act in these words,
“excepting the sixteenth and thirty-sixth section, which shall be reserved
to the state of Kansas for school purposes. . . . ” 21 We assume that the other
requests were handled administratively instead of encumbering the act with
unnecessary verbiage.

It should be noticed that no mention of compensation for the Osages is
made. Chapter 251 of 21 Stat. L. 291 provides payment for the school lands
in the Osage Trust Lands and to the Civilization Fund in the Osage Ceded
Lands. Yet, no mention is made of payment for school lands in the Dimin¬
ished Reserve. 22 It seems strange that specific mention of the Trust Lands
and Ceded Lands is made but no mention of the larger Diminished Reserve
is made. Since both the Diminished Reserve and Trust Lands were included

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

324 / Osage Removal

in the Removal Agreement of 1870, it is possible that the term Trust Lands
in the 1880 Act applies to both areas. However, this omission and the Ceded
Lands provision do raise some questions.

We have not found any source that indicates either payment or nonpay¬
ment for school lands in the Diminished Reserve. The question here is: Were
the Osages ever paid for the school lands in the Diminished Reserve? A
second question arises from the Ceded Lands and the Civilization Fund. In
settling old claims, was the school lands money included in the total indem¬
nity payment?

Amounts Involved

Parsons commented on the amount of land and money involved in these
school lands: “The total amount of Osage land sold under the removal act
of July 15, 1870, was 8,000,000 acres. Of this amount the act reserved to
Kansas one-eighteenth, or 14,444, acres for public purposes. At one dollar
and twenty-five cents an acre, this amount would have brought $555,555-” 23
It seems there are some mathematical errors in this comment. One-eight¬
eenth of 8,000,000 acres would be 444,444 acres instead of 14,444 acres.
$1.25 times 14,444 would be $18,055 rather than $555,555. We multiplied
444,444 acres by $1.25 and got the figure of $555,555. In any event, appar¬
ently well over one-half million dollars were involved. Somewhere around
this amount should appear to the credit of the Osages for school lands, if the
Diminished Reserve was included.

The case for the Trust Lands and Diminished Reserve seems clear enough.
However, the school lands problem in the Ceded Lands is muddied by other
complications. By 1869-1880, most of the Ceded Lands had been commit¬
ted, thus the Act of 1880 had little effect there. However, due to this fact, the
state of Kansas was awarded in lieu lands plus five percent in cash for all
Indian land sold for cash. 24 The in lieu lands and 5 percent cash on cash sales
seem to include the Trust Land and Diminished Reserve as well as the
Ceded Lands. This again raises the question of Osage compensation, since
all expenses were deducted from the Osage share of the sales.

The whole problem of the compensation for the school lands needs more
careful investigation than we are prepared to undertake for this history. An¬
other unexplored area is compensation for Osage property stolen or de¬
stroyed by citizens of the United States. The Osages were required to pay
for property they took or destroyed. One must wonder if the American laws
work only in one direction (i.e., the Osages paid for their wrongs but nei¬
ther United States citizens nor the United States ever paid for Osage prop¬
erty stolen and destroyed by American citizens).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 325
THE MIXED-BLOODS
Leaders

Amazing as it may seem, very little has been written about the mixed-
bloods. 25 In a general work such as this, it is impossible to deal with this
large subject in detail. However, one small detail should be mentioned. There
were only two known mixed-bloods who served in a leadership capacity
before the Osage removal from Kansas. These were Jean Baptiste Mongrain
(Mogrey) and Sophia Captain Chouteau. Jean Baptiste was chief of the
Neosho village, Reaches the Sky. Mrs. Chouteau was called Woman Chief 26
and served as second chief and subsequently as chief of the Beaver band on
Flat Rock Creek near the Osage Mission in Kansas. Yet it is important to
remember that these mixed-bloods lived the traditional life and were con¬
sidered to be full-bloods by the Osage full-bloods themselves.

Mixed Marriages

The earliest mixed marriages with Euro-Americans grew out of the fur
trade. Three portage routes brought the early French fur traders to the Middle
Waters and the Osages. These were the Georgian Bay-Green Bay-Missis-
sippi River route, the Georgian Bay-Des Plaines River-Illinois River-
Mississippi route, and the Georgian Bay-Detroit-Toledo-Maumee River-
Wabash River-Ohio River-Mississippi River route. While some traders
came to the Middle Waters from New Orleans, most of them used the port¬
age routes out of Montreal.

Before 1763, these traders who intermarried with the Osages lived at Vin¬
cennes, Indiana; Kaskaskia, Illinois; Cahokia, Illinois; Ste. Genevieve, Mis¬
souri; and Cape Girardeau, Missouri. With the founding of St. Louis and St.
Charles in Missouri, most of the Osage-French families settled in these two
communities. During the War of 1812, the majority of the Osage-French
families lived at Cote Sans Dessein, located opposite the mouth of the
Osage River in Missouri. This situation changed in 1820 with the founding
of Westport Landing, which later became Kansas City. At this date, and until
a few years after 1847, practically all the Osage-French mixed-bloods lived
either at Westport or Papinsville, Missouri, near the major Osage villages in
Bates and Vernon County.

A small number of French-Osage mixed-bloods were with the Astorians
and settled on French Prairie in Oregon. So far as we know, none of these
ever rejoined the Osages. Several families of French-Osage mixed-bloods
settled near Tumwater, Washington, at a place called Cowlitz Prairie. Most
of these returned to the Osages in 1870-1872. A few of the French-Osage

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

326 / Osage Removal

participated in the California gold rush, but apparently all these returned to
the Osages. 27

Many mixed-bloods were intermarried with both the Osage and Kaw.
At allotment, this caused a considerable amount of hard feeling. Some
mixed-bloods were enrolled on the Kaw rolls and some on the Osage rolls.
Therefore, the Osages did not want to accept any of the French-Osage-Kaw
mixed-bloods. It was not a question of Osage blood since many of these
mixed-bloods were known to be Osage related. The big question was where
the mixed-blood resided or where they were enrolled. The feeling was that
if one did not reside with the Osages, he or she should not be considered as
Osage. United States laws also recognized only the enrollment in one tribe.

It was advantageous to the fur traders to have an Osage wife and a white
wife. From the Osage view, this carried no stigma unless the marriage was
a non-Osage marriage. While the Osages accepted the validity of a Chris¬
tian marriage between two Euro-Americans, they did not recognize such
marriages when an Osage spouse was involved. Children of such marriages
could not be named and carried the stigma of the marriage all their lives.
No honors could devolve on the partners of such a marriage. Since a white
man had no Osage clan, if he married an Osage woman the children could
not be named without adoption by a male member of an Osage clan. In a
reverse marriage, however (that is, if the husband was Osage and the wife a
white woman), the children could be named without adoption because the
Osage father had an Osage clan.

Most of the early Osage mixed-blood marriages with Euro-Americans
were between a white man and Osage woman. Some estimation of the
esteem held for a trader by the Osages was revealed by the daughter that was
allowed to marry the trader. Osage sons and daughters have pet names that
are given in the order of birth. That is, the first son born is called E gw, the
second was called Ka short, the third was called Ka shin ka, and so on. The
daughters were called Me na for first daughter, We ha for second daughter,
and Ah sen ka for the third daughter. In most families, Me na was the favored
daughter. Thus, a white man who married a first daughter was indeed held
in high esteem. If the white man was allowed to marry the second daughter,
it was also a great honor but somewhat less than that of a first daughter
marriage. The third daughter on down to the last daughter were considered
to be equal but less desirable than the first two daughters. Most mixed mar¬
riages with Euro-Americans were with third daughters.

Two Groups of Mixed-Bloods

There were two distinct groups of Osage-Euro-American mixed bloods.
One of these groups tended to live apart from the traditional Osages. They

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 327

were very much like any French habitant in their lifestyle. The other group
tended to live with the full-bloods, and they followed the traditional Osage
lifestyle. All mixed-bloods of the latter group were counted as full-bloods
in population reports, and they were considered to be full-bloods by the true
full-bloods. Only the first group was enumerated as mixed-bloods in the
pre-removal reports. At the time of the Kansas removal, this first group was
called the Half-Breed Band for the first time.

Some research based on the early practice of enumerating mixed-bloods
living the traditional life as full-bloods show an unrealistic growth of mixed-
bloods in the early-18 80s. In some studies, it is assumed this growth was the
result of Euro-Americans or other mixed-blood Indians being added to the
Osage rolls. Certainly, to some extent this is true. However, many families
that were contested were not excluded by virtue of not having Osage blood,
but because they had not resided on Osage lands in 1881. In part, this was
to exclude Osages who had foresworn Osage citizenship for some other
Indian nation or for United States citizenship.

As mixed-bloods increased and full-bloods declined, the mixed-bloods
exerted an increasing influence in Osage affairs. The increase in mixed-
bloods was due to several factors. By 1868, it was increasingly evident that
the Osage annuities would provide a sizable cash income for the times. There¬
fore, several persons with some Osage blood either returned to the Osages
or changed to Osage citizenship. Some full-blood Indians on the Osage rolls
are only a small fraction Osage, but elected to be enrolled as Osages. For
some reason, these mixed-bloods caused no demand for proof of Osage
blood as was required of Osage-Euro-American mixed-bloods.

By far, the single greatest factor creating the shifting ratios, was the rela¬
tive birthrates. Both the Osage-French and the Osage-Irish mixed-bloods
had very large families of ten to fifteen children. By contrast, full-blood
families show only two to four children on the annuity rolls. 2ls Related to
the birthrate is the death rate. While both full-bloods and mixed-bloods
show an abnormal death rate following removal, the death rate of the full-
bloods was easily twice that of the mixed-bloods.

This was possibly due to living conditions and diet. A lodge becomes
unhealthy when less time is spent on the hunt and more time is spent in¬
doors. Since the full-bloods were relying less on the hunt and more on is¬
sued rations, they were not as active outdoors and especially not on the
healthful Great Plains. Rations were a poor substitute for the rich, varied
diet of earlier Osage generations. The mixed-bloods had adopted ranching
and subsistence farming so they had a much better and more reliable diet.

As full-blood and mixed-blood numbers reached equality and then the
mixed-bloods grew more numerous than the full-bloods, friction grew be-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

328 / Osage Removal

tween the two groups. Tribal power was passing from the full-bloods to the
mixed-bloods. For the first time, the mixed-bloods experienced the humil¬
ity of discrimination from their full-blood relatives. To be shunned by Euro-
Americans was an experience that was not novel. Such actions carried a
sting that made the Osage blood especially dear to the mixed-bloods, for
they were treated well by their Osage brethren. Now that which had healed
many wounds inflicted by the white culture was inflicting wounds of
its own.

Such actions turned the mixed-bloods inward upon themselves and in
effect created a separate Osage culture. Thus, when one spoke of Osages,
two groups were included. These were the full-blood and mixed-blood
Osages, which included two separate cultures. They shared a common an¬
cestry and tradition, but they were almost as different as the British and
Americans. Fortunately, the two groups are drawing closer and hopefully
the Osages will be one people again in another generation.

“Hopefully” is used advisably, for new alignments are beginning to
emerge. Currently, the mixed-blood distinction is all but gone. Yet, a grow¬
ing division is evident, based on those within commuting distance of Paw-
huska and those who live far away. It is sad that the Osages have been their
own worst enemy. The rift of 1800 29 weakened the people and contributed
to a rapid decline. With the removal came a growing rift between full-blood
and mixed-blood. This rift of 1880 brought an end to the great Osage tribal
organization. Even the term tribe was replaced by the name, Osage nation.
Now we risk disunity and failure to create a form of government that is of
the Osage people and for the Osage people. Petty factionalism weakens a
people by diverting energies against each other. These same energies could
be better used in restoring the Osage people to their rightful position in the
world.

The foregoing essay about the mixed-bloods was to provide background
and direction for the mixed-blood role in the removal from Kansas and the
aftermath. We are ready to enter the story of that role.

Mixed-Blood Objections to Removal

Without a doubt, the conference the Removal Committee held with the
Osage mixed-bloods was the first time they had been consulted about
Osage affairs. It is also the first time the records mention opinions of the
mixed-bloods. Apparently, it was the mixed-bloods who first objected to
the intruders on the new proposed reserve in Indian Territory. Having twice
been dispossessed by intruders in the past five years, the mixed-bloods did
not want to repeat the experience a third time. One can understand, in the
light of past experiences, why oral or written promises carried little assur-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 329

ance with the mixed-bloods. With them, “seeing was believing.” When the
intruders were removed, they would believe it, but not before a physical re¬
moval had been effected.

The mixed-bloods also had other concerns. The lands they occupied
were worth much more than $1.25 an acre. New improvements had barely
been completed since the 1865 removal from the Neosho Valley. Under¬
standably, the mixed-bloods felt they should be paid for these improvements.
Insofar as possible, they felt some payment should be made for their property
destroyed or stolen by the intruders. Finally, several of the mixed-bloods had
a desire to remain on their claims, to take American citizenship, and to be¬
come a part of the Euro-American community.

The intruders, seeing that these reasonable objections of the mixed-bloods
could well delay the acceptance of removal, sought to ease the mixed-
blood’s concerns. Meetings were held throughout southern and southeastern
Kansas to deal with the mixed-blood problem. In every case, promises were
made to the mixed-bloods that they would be supported in every way. Cli¬
maxing these meetings was a mass meeting in Montgomery County that
drafted a “guarantee of community support” for the mixed-bloods. Na¬
ively, the Removal Commission accepted this statement in good faith and
pledged to do all in their power to enforce the community pledge. After
the mixed-bloods signed the Removal Act, the settlers commented, “The
Osages have signed the bill, and we have got the land; let the half-breeds go
to H—l.” 30

Filing for United States Citizenship

Following the signing of the “community compact,” nineteen mixed-
bloods filed their first papers for United States citizenship. 31 Their names
and ages were as follows: (1) Joseph Mosier [Monjeon], 28; (2) Francis
Mitchell [Mikles], 45; (3) Alexander Beyett, 33; (4) Heweh ha ka Toby, 30;
(5) Wild Cat, 30; (6) Martin Redman, 25; (7) Wooster Bigheart, 28; (8) Peter
Chouteau, 40; (9) John Fitz-Gerald, 25; (10) George Redeagle, 35; (11)
CyprianTayrian, 34; (12) Joseph Mitchell [Mikles], 30; (13) Dodridge Boonby
[Barnaby], 48; (14) Jack Eatsataneka, 28; (15) Peter O’Carter, 35; (16) Mad
Chief, 35; (17) Te ka ah ka pa na, 26; (18) Gesso Chouteau, 48; and (19)
William Tinker, 30. 32

Harassment by the intruders who had promised to support the mixed-
bloods soon reduced this list of nineteen to only twelve—thirty had origi¬
nally expressed a desire to remain in Kansas, but only nineteen took out first
papers. The twelve remaining by Christmas of 1870 were: (1) Alexander
Beyett; (2) Gesso Chouteau; (3) Peter Chouteau; (4) Joseph Mosier [Mon¬
jeon]; (5) Frank Mitchell [Mikles]; (6) [?]; (7) Martin Redman; (8) Tobey

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

330 / Osage Removal

Mogrey [Mongrain]; (9) Red Eagle; (10) Mad Chief; (11) Little Wildcat; and
(12) Hlah se jack. 33

The mixed-blood situation in Kansas grew worse as time passed. All
of the mixed-bloods were harassed, and, eventually, they returned to the
Osages. Certainly, the case of Joseph Mosier (Monjeon) illustrates the ter¬
rible things done to these mixed-bloods. Joseph Mosier had served honor¬
ably as a Union soldier during the Civil War. He was forcibly removed from
his home at night and of necessity had to wade through the snow to find
help. His home and granary were burned. Joseph died from the exposure.
He had committed no crime except being part Osage and owning land that
white men wanted. 34

We will not dwell on these wrongs. However, as a people, the Osages
must remember that these experiences were bought at a terrible price. They
must remember not to trust even written promises that lack an absolute
means of enforcement. All agreements should have a guaranteed right of
redress for violation of agreements. Lastly, beware of greed and excessive
emotions, for they are the traits of an unstable mind.

SEARCHING FOR THE THIRTY-SEVENTH PARALLEL

A Matter of Errors

Thirty-seven degrees north latitude is the boundary line between Kansas
and Oklahoma. One would suppose that if Columbus could locate and sail
a course along the 25th parallel in 1492, a surveyor could locate a parallel
and survey a straight line in 1870. Between Ennisville 35 and Elgin, Kansas,
the distance is about twenty miles east and west. The surveyed line of 1856
was approximately one-quarter mile off in this twenty miles. Apparently,
there was a magnetic deflection in Sprague s Valley or Elgin, Kansas. Captain
Poland, who had been sent to clear intruders from the new Osage reserve
in 1870, met surveyor Max Fawcell who said that because of a compass
problem he had set the line a quarter mile north as a supplementary line. 36

There are one-quarter-mile errors all along the thirty-seventh parallel
between the two states. 37 We cannot account for the errors along the pan¬
handle of Oklahoma, but we do have the reason for the offset at Elgin.
Having walked and traveled horseback over the thirty-seventh on either
side of Elgin, I can state it has no offset today. It is a straight east-west line
between Chautauqua Springs and Cedar Vale, Kansas. In a high school
Physical Geography course, a class project was to survey the line along the
south edge of Elgin. Then, we noticed no special magnetic deflection on the
transit compass. This entire area was carefully resurveyed in the 1940s and
1950s for the Hulah Dam on the Caney. The topographic maps all show the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 331

37th as a straight line. Evidently, the supplementary line formed a base line
in the Elgin area in 1870. By measuring with the chain a quarter mile south
from this line one could accurately locate the true line.

Elgin, Kansas

Elgin originated one-quarter mile south of the thirty-seventh. It was then
called Jim Town after the Jimson Weeds that were growing there. 38 The
town was on the site of an Osage hunting camp called Gra to Me Shin ka
or Little Hawk Woman. The name was changed to Elgin to satisfy the Postal
Department, which established an office in the town when it was moved
north of the thirty-seventh. 39

Captain Poland, who arrived in Elgin after it had been moved, always in
his journal calls the town Elgin and never Jim Town. And he states that the
supplementary line was north one-quarter mile. This would be about where
the quarantine line of the cattle shipping days was located or north of the
present line about one-quarter mile. It was probably the survey of Max
Fawcell in 1870 that caused the town to remove one-quarter mile north.

The southern boundary of Kansas has caused concern by other historians.
In 1910, George W Martin, Secretary of the Kansas State Historical Society,
wrote to John Francis Jr., then acting chief of the Federal Land Division.
Martin was attempting to clarify the locating of the thirty-seventh. In his
reply, Mr. Francis gives a comprehensive survey of the history of the south¬
ern boundary. 40

INTRUDERS ON THE NEW RESERVE
Responsibility

According to the agreement of 1870, all intruders were to be removed from
the new reserve before the Osages left Kansas. In trying to meet this agree¬
ment, the United States government encountered unexpected problems.
Hence, the removal of intruders was not effective. The basic problem was a
matter of determining which department of the government would accept
responsibility for the removal of the intruders.

It was no small matter to offer one’s self to be the target for all the ex¬
pansion-minded American citizens. Politically, it was a very dangerous
move. Surely, the army did not want to endanger the popularity it was en¬
joying in the post-Civil War days. While the Indian Office was in no way
experiencing popularity, it was at least out of the public eye. Few of the
people holding Indian Office positions wanted their activities exposed to
public view. Another aspect of the situation was the behind-the-scene ef¬
forts of the War Department to reclaim the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Ac-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

332 / Osage Removal

cepting responsibility for using troops to remove intruders could tip the
balance against the War Department.

The matter of removing these intruders from the new Osage reserve was
the subject of a Cabinet meeting on August 5, 1870. At this meeting, the
Cabinet was definite in a decision that these intruders must be removed. On
August 5, General Sherman sent orders to General John Pope to remove the
intruders. 41 Pope was in command of the district involved. He sent orders
to Captain John Scroggs Poland, who commanded in southeast Kansas, to
meet Captain Craig, who was the Cherokee agent, at Baxter Springs, Kansas.

A classic example of “passing the buck” on an unpopular action can be
seen in Captain Poland s orders from General Pope. General Pope was very
careful to stress the importance of not originating any plan or accepting any
responsibility for removing intruders. Pope reasoned that since Indian res¬
ervations were the exclusive jurisdiction of the Indian Office, then that of¬
fice should be responsible. Captain Poland was further ordered to act only
under the direction of an Indian agent. 42 Generally, Poland followed these
orders, but he did take minor individual action without consulting the
Cherokee agent.

Remember that in 1870 the army was trying to regain control of Indian
Affairs. There is no way to determine how much of this “buck passing” was
due to this factor and how much was due to the desire to stay politically
popular. In all probability, some of the reluctance to expedite the removal
of intruders was an effort to cast the Office of Indian Affairs in a bad light.

Apparently, the Cherokee agent had few misgivings about removing the
intruders. He firmly requested Captain Poland to “remove as promptly as
possible all intruders in this territory.” 43 The only remaining problem for
Captain Poland was to determine where the southern line of Kansas was
located. Although the line was dimly marked by a survey, a great deal of
uncertainty about its location existed. Captain Poland and the Cherokee
agent agreed to leave the doubtful settlers alone until another survey could
be made. Yet, the greater problem of settlers far to the south was also prac¬
tically ignored.

Captain Poland’s Actions

From Ennisville, located a few yards below the Kansas-Oklahoma line on
the Little Caney, Captain Poland went to the mouth of the Little Caney. It
was thought in 1870 that Ennisville was in Kansas. This was subsequently
proven wrong. 44 However, assuming the settlers were on legal ground Cap¬
tain Poland did not disturb them. No intruders were found between Ennis¬
ville and the mouth of the Little Caney. Their cabins were vacant, and it was
assumed they had returned to Kansas.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Osage Removal / 333

On the next day, Captain Poland went south to Bird Creek, which he
called Dog Creek. By September 27,1870, Captain Poland was camped near
Elgin, Kansas. What intruders he had found willingly moved back across the
thirty-seventh as Captain Poland defined the location of the line. Traders in
the area were not disturbed as long as they had trading licenses. Poland went
as far west as Arkansas City, Kansas, and then returned to Elgin. From there
he went east to Chetopa, Kansas, and then back to his headquarters. 45

Captain Poland was not overly concerned about removing intruders. His
movements suggest more of an exploration operation than a removal action.
According to his reports, he did little more than let the intruders know of
his presence. It has been estimated that there were between 2,500 to 3,000
intruders in the Caney Valley watershed at the time of Captain Polands
visit. 46 Nothing in his reports indicate this many intruders.

It is evident that the Captain did not explore many valleys of the Caney
drainage. Neither Buck Creek of the northwest, Pond Creek, Turkey Creek,
Mission Creek, Elm Creek, Beaver Creek, nor Salt Creek was mentioned in
his reports. These streams were also omitted on his map. Settlements on
these tributary streams were often as heavy as along the Big Caney.

Both the intruders and Captain Poland followed the well-worn Osage
buffalo trails, which has been described and shown on maps in an earlier
chapter. It may be worth the effort to review these, because the intruders
used the well-traveled trails to invade the area.

Conflicts between Captain Poland’s Reports and the Views of

the Intruders

Captain Poland reported his activities to his superiors. Without exception,
he reported that the intruders had returned either by request or by rumor.
He had granted a delay for the intruders of the Donelson settlement. If one
were to accept Poland’s reports at their face value, it would be easy to believe
the intruder problem in the new Osage reserve was solved.

However, the intruders themselves tell a different story. The evidence of
our own day and time tend to support the intruder view instead of the
reports of Captain Poland. These intruder families admitted that some of
them did go back to Kansas but returned to their “stands” after the army
left. However, the majority bluntly admitted that they remained where they
were and ignored the orders to leave the area. 47

Uncle John Buckmaster (sometimes given as Buckston) was one of the
intruders of the Donelson settlement. He influenced several families from
the St. Paul, Kansas, area to settle there. The Donelson settlement was at the
White Swan ford on the Caney. That is, it centered on the left bank at that
site, but it was strung out upriver and downriver on both banks. Two ceme-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

334 / Osage Removal

teries were used by these people. One of these is the Canville Cemetery,
which was moved with the Boulanger Cemetery one-half mile north of
Boulanger, Oklahoma, when Hulah Dam was built. The other is between
Highway 99 and White Swan ford, on the last hill between Pond Creek and
the Caney. A. B. Canville built his second trading post at White Swan ford.
This post was on the left bank and formed the center of the settlement.

In later days, the Bureau of Indian Affairs required these intruders to pay
a rental fee to the Osage people. The Agency kept record books of the fees
and whomever paid for the permit. These books are presently at the Fort
Worth, Texas, Records Center. 48 The many evidences of the failure of Cap¬
tain Poland’s mission provide direct contradiction of his reports. When one
looks at violations of agreements, it is interesting to seek out the reasons for
the violation. Nevertheless, the fact that this agreement was violated stands
as another crime against the Osage people.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

The Final Move

INTRODUCTION: GIBSON AND THE OSAGES

When Isaac T. Gibson became agent to the Osage people in 1869, they were
in danger of extinction. No better introduction to the final move of the
Osages and their survival could be found than the relationship between
Gibson and the Osage people. Roughly, this period would be between 1870
and 1875.

The 96° west longitude line, which is the eastern boundary of the Osage
reservation, has been surveyed at least three times. A second survey was
made upon the insistence of Gibson. This survey placed the 96th several
miles east of the original survey line. Gibson was elated with the report of
the second survey, but the Cherokee insisted the first survey was correct.

Agent Gibson was determined to make farmers of the Osages. However,
the Osages were equally determined not to be farmers. To Gibson, the Caney
River Valley was the only good farmland in the proposed Osage reservation.
Yet, the Osages felt that good farmland would attract white intruder farm¬
ers. They possibly also realized that the absence of good tillage lands would
prevent Gibson from converting them into farmers. These conflicting view¬
points had an important bearing on the acquisition of the present reserva¬
tion.

Originally, the proposed reservation was divided in half by the present
96th west longitude line. This proposal comprised only about one-third as
many acres as the present reservation, or nearly 500,000 acres. Gibson was
delighted with this proposal since it included the better sections of the
Caney Valley. He located the new agency near the center of this proposed
reservation, which was on Rice Creek near Silver Lake, south of Bartles¬
ville, Oklahoma. The Cherokee opposed this proposed reservation for two
reasons. They argued that the original survey was the correct location of the
96th and that the offered price of fifty cents per acre should be one dollar

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

336 / Final Move

twenty-five cents an acre. The Osages made “bluff gestures” toward the
Caney Valley area east of the 96th, but their real goal was a larger reservation
that extended west to the Salt Plains.

To resolve these differences, a commission was sent to evaluate the pro¬
posed reservation and a third survey was made to locate the 96° west lon¬
gitude line. After a brief tour of the better parts of the proposed reservation,
the commission recommended a price of one dollar twenty-five cents per
acre. To make matters worse, the new survey located the 96th a few feet west
of the original survey line. Gibson was furious and more than a little bitter,
but he removed the agency west to Deep Ford on Bird Creek, now Paw-
huska, Oklahoma. He then supported the Osage demand for a larger area
and fought to lower the price per acre below fifty cents.

President Grant ultimately decided the price issue as provided in the
Cherokee Treaty of 1866. Since the price was set at seventy cents per acre,
neither the Osages nor Cherokees were satisfied. In both the Treaty of 1865
and the removal act of 1870, the government had promised that the new
reservation would not cost more than fifty cents an acre. To compensate the
Osages for reneging on the guaranteed ceiling of fifty cents an acre agree¬
ment and to give the Cherokee more money, the United States consented
to enlarging the reservation by two-thirds. The Osages now had a home and
it consisted of almost one and one-half million acres.

Several points should be observed in connection with the acquisition of
the present Osage reservation. While Gibson and the Osages held conflict¬
ing cultural viewpoints, they shared the same sense of justice. Both parties
sought the best possible terms for the people. Although we have not pre¬
viously stressed it, the Osages bought their reservation. So far as we know,
the Osages and Kaws were the only Indian nations in Oklahoma to acquire
their reservation in this manner. As later events will show, this was an ex¬
tremely important fact. Finally, with the acquisition of their last home, the
mold of the future Osages was cast. They tended to become ranchers instead
of farmers. The vast reaches of bluestem grass were an open invitation to
grazing. Furthermore, the grass sprung from a thin layer of rich soil cover¬
ing beds of plow-defying limestone.

While these facts alone would have made the Osage reservation a great
grazing region, location and the developing history of the United States
thrust the Osages into the mainstream of the cattle industry. Isaac T. Gibson
and the Osage leadership had now assured the Osage presence as a people
and had aided them in securing an economic future. 1

It has been estimated that there were 3,150 members of the Osage people
who made the move from Kansas. Ninety-two percent of these were full-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 337

blood Osages. 2 Today, the total for those with Osage blood numbers more
than eighteen thousand. Unfortunately, the percentage of full-blood Osages
has reversed. Most Osages of the present are Osage-Euro-American mix¬
ture with Osage-Other Indian mixture making up the second most numer¬
ous group.

SELECTING THE NEW RESERVE
The Selection Committee

Things were progressing well in the removal process, aside from the treat¬
ment forced upon the Osages by the intruders. A new Council had been
created, and for the first time it included several mixed-bloods. This Council
was comprised of Ah ke ta Ki he ka (Soldier Chief), Gus Strike Axe, Gov¬
ernor Joe, Little Lame Doctor, Hu lali Tsah, Ki he ka Stet sy (Tall Chief), O
la ho Walla (Beautiful Voice), Cyprian Tayrien, Malt short ka Tal (Black Dog),
William H. Tinker, and Augustus Chouteau (interpreter).

The new Council appointed a fourteen-member committee to select the
new reservation. It is interesting to observe that while the appointive Coun¬
cil was a creation of Gibsons, the Council named traditional leaders to this
committee. The members were Governor Joe, No pa Walla (Thunder Fear),
Ki he ka Shin ka (Little Chief), No Heart (Possibly Big Heart), Alexander
Beyett, Augustus Captain, Sam Bienvineu, Mon shou Ka shi, Ea holt ka, Hard
Rope, Che To pa (Tsi To pa, or Four Lodges), Wa ti An Ka (Dry Plume), Old
Claremore, and Black Dog. 3

The Size of the Proposed Reserve and Population

Upon the findings of the selection committee and Isaac Gibson, the Coun¬
cil selected a tract for the new reserve on October 26, 1870. This area was
equally divided by the 96th meridian, as was determined by a second survey
of this line. The reserve was to be sixty miles long, north and south, and
sixteen and two-thirds miles wide, east and west. It was to contain 640,000
acres. 4

While it is almost entirely surmise, it seems that the traditional Osages
were intentionally cooperating with Gibson to achieve their own purpose.
We base this surmise on four factors: (1) The Osages were hunters who
desperately wanted to avoid any further contacts with intruders; (2) They
did not want to be farmers nor did they want to own lands that would be
attractive to intruders; (3) The Osages knew these lands better than the
Cherokee or anyone else. It is extremely unlikely that they were not aware
of the location of the 96th (the Cherokee pointed out this fact); and (4) It

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

338 / Final Move

would have been entirely in keeping with the Osage character to have made
a thrust in one direction to make a gain in another direction. By contrast,
meek acceptance of the desires of the Indian Office was not the Osage way.

Subsequent events tend to support these basic observations. One must
keep in mind what the Osages wanted and not what the Bureau of Indian
Affairs wanted for them. At every opportunity, the Osages pushed for more
land and the extension of the reserve west to the Salt Plains. These requests
were opposite to what Gibson was trying to get for them, and the Osage
knew this. Yet, they also knew they could not get what they wanted without
Gibson’s blessing. Therefore, they convinced Gibson that they were terribly
disappointed when they did not get the rich Caney Valley east of the 96th.
A people who could mourn the death of an enemy they had killed would
find this act of deception mere child’s play.

The 640,000 acres of the first choice reserve further supports our sur¬
mise. Gibson had taken a census of the Osages and had arrived at a popu¬
lation of 3,150. However, the Osages had convinced him there were 850
absentees. 5 This brought the total to 4,000. Thus, 640,000 acres would pro¬
vide 160 acres for each of 4,000 persons. This population “boost” clearly
shows the Osages desired quantity instead of quality in land.

Silver Lake

Many mixed-bloods started making improvements around Silver Lake. This
was east of the true 96° west longitude line, but about on the second, or
false, line. Most of the buildings were on the east side of the lake, including
the Agency, while Louis Chouteau’s post was south of the little settlement. 6
As a sidelight to this community, Julia Roy Lessert Papin—the step-grand-
mother of Charles Curtis, Vice President under Herbert Hoover—is buried
at Silver Lake. Curtis lost his parents at a young age and was raised by his
grandfather, Joe Papin, and step-grandmother, Julia Papin. Julia Papin was
born Julia Roy and married first Clement Lessert.

Throwing the Osages “Into the Bluffs”

Because of a third survey, it was determined that Silver Lake was indeed
east of the 96th. Along with the survey of 1871 came a decision by Secre¬
tary of the Interior Columbus Delano that the Osages were not “civilized”
Indians. 7 This fact barred the Osages from taking up lands east of the 96th.
If the Osages were not “civilized” in 1871, it is a little difficult to explain
how they became “civilized” within a decade. When the so-called five civ¬
ilized tribes were forming their merger, the Osages were invited to join
them. Fearing the loss of their autonomy, the Osages refused the invitation.

Superintendent Enoch Hoag bitterly declared that the Osage were being

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 339

“thrown into the bluffs.” 8 This was an expression of Gibsons low esteem
for the bulk of the Osage reserve. However, beauty lies in the eye of the be¬
holder. To the Osage eye, the cross timbers of the east and the rolling Osage
prairies to the west were more beautiful than the Caney bottoms. Based on
the Euro-American economy of the 1870s, the Osages were “thrown into
the bluffs.” Such land had little economic value in the post-Civil War pe¬
riod. Less than two percent of the present reserve is tillable land.

Without a doubt, the Osages were aware of the white man’s greed, and
they were aware that the Cherokee was infected with the same malady. They
knew that a few years earlier the Cherokees had been eager to sell their
restricted interest in the entire outlet for twenty-five cents per acre. Sud¬
denly, when it was discovered that the Osages were to get one dollar twenty-
five cents an acre for their Kansas lands and that the Osages were to be
settled in the outlet, the price went to one dollar twenty-five cents.

Apparently, the Osages were being tapped to make the Cherokee richer.
Surely, the fears of an Osage uprising expressed by American officials would
lead one to suspect a clouded conscience. Note that these fears were much
like the fear of the Osages expressed by the Spanish a century earlier. It was
these fears generated by troubled consciences and possibly fed by Osage
planted rumors that led to a meeting.

Many Osages had camped on Pond Creek in the present reserve. These
were primarily the three independent Little Osage bands under Strike Axe.
The campsite is one-half mile upstream from the Highway 99 bridge across
Pond Creek. Strike Axe remained here for some years, but the other two
independent Little Osage bands eventually settled on Mission Creek near
Bowring, Oklahoma.

Isaac Gibson, Mahlon Stubbs (the Kaw agent), and George Howland (one
of the three commissioners sent to settle the Osage problems) met with the
Osages encamped on Pond Creek. They arranged for a general Osage meet¬
ing to be held at the Silver Lake Agency. Thus, the stage was set for the final
scene in the drama of selecting a final home for the Osages.

Reaching Agreement on the Final Reserve

Seventy-five Osage leaders met with the three commissioners from Wash¬
ington in the afternoon of March 1, 1871. The commissioners read their
instructions, and the Osages retired to consider the alternatives given by the
Indian Office. On the evening of March 4, the Osages requested a conven¬
ing of the council. Once assembled, Governor Joe presented the commis¬
sioners with a document the Osages had prepared. 9

In this document containing the Osage proposal we find the real Osage
intention. In our opinion, this was the climax of the Osage maneuvers. The

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

340 / Final Move

Osages agreed to accept lands west of the 96th. However, they included an
increase in size as compensation for the loss of lands east of that line. Bound¬
aries were described as the Kansas line on the north and running sixty miles
south to the Creek north line. Taking the 96th as the east line and the chan¬
nel of the Arkansas River as the west line completed the bounds. These
boundaries may seem clear at first glance, but the south line, in part, follows
the Arkansas River and not the Creek line. Added to this requirement of
acceptance was a request for a small tract west of the Arkansas.

A major purpose of this request was to provide an outlet to the buffalo
hunting grounds. Although this request was not granted, the purpose was
achieved. In the final act, the Osages were given the right of passage and the
right to hunt buffalo as long as there were buffalo to hunt. Agreement was
reached the next day and the Osages had their new reserve assured. The
price remained to be set by the President, but the reserve had finally been
selected. Nearly a square mile for each Osage had been included in the
agreement.

A QUESTION OF SIZE AND PRICE
Setting the Size

While we have mentioned that the final size of the new reserve was much
larger than originally intended, we did not go into any detail as to how it
became so large. To discuss the size of the new reservation, we must go back
to the agreement to removal. The Osages had petitioned for six things as
a part of the agreement. These were: (1) They asked that the government
should pay them $300,000 for damages caused by intruders; (2) They re¬
quested permission to buy more land than 160 acres per person; (3) They
asked that they be permitted to hold their lands in common until they re¬
quested individual allotment; (4) They asked for the right to hunt buffalo as
long as they were plentiful; (5) They asked for protection from intruders; and
(6) They requested that they be allowed to purchase as additional lands the
acreage of Kansas school lands in their purchase of a reservation. 1 "

One does not need to be blessed with much insight to realize the Osages
were deeply concerned about the size of their new reservation. They were
not merely hunters—they were buffalo hunters. It was a matter of serious
consequence to them if they should be blocked from the buffalo hunt. They
allowed the $300,000 indemnity claim to lapse in preference to a larger
reserve which, in turn, meant access to the buffalo.

By asking and getting the right to hold their land in common until they
requested individual allotment, the Osages gained an important right. Nei-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 341

ther the Dawes Act (General Allotment Act) nor the later Curtis Act could
be applied to them. Thus, on the eve of Oklahoma statehood, the Osages,
by holding their lands in common, were in a strong bargaining position.
Among other things, which we will discuss in due course, this position en¬
abled them to retain mineral rights in common.

A serious barrier to enlarging the new Osage reserve was the Cherokee
Treaty of 1866. By this treaty, all reservations carved from the outlet were
limited to 160 acres per capita. However, since the Osage Treaty of 1865 had
been bent and twisted to accommodate the Cherokee, it was felt that a vio¬
lation of the Cherokee Treaty would balance things out. The Cherokee were
interested in the total amount of money and not necessarily the amount of
land.

There was a concern within the United States government about the
amount of land involved in settling the Osages on their new reservation.
Commissioner Francis A. Walker raised this question in his comments about
the Osage request for more land.

Without apprehending that there will be any considerable difficulty in
obtaining future further cessions of territory from tribes within the
Indian country as the government shall desire, it would still be my
belief that it was decidedly injudicious to exceed in any case the
amount contemplated in that treaty, viz., 160 acres to each member of
a friendly tribe so settled upon the ceded lands, were it not that the
Osages have suffered great hardship and wrong in the country from
which they came, and have now encountered a grievous disappoint¬
ment in their expected home in the Indian country, solely through the
failure of the government to properly determine their location. If the
injuries which the Osages have suffered in the past, their disappoint¬
ment now through the fault of the Government, and the manifest and
urgent importance of adjusting the difficulty without delay, are held
to constitute a sufficient reason for allowing these Indians to purchase
more land than was contemplated in the treaty of 1866,1 know of no
reason why this agreement should not be pronounced expedient, so far
as the United States is concerned. ... 11

Walker clearly states the reasons for granting the additional lands to the
Osages. The fact that he urges the acceptance of the Osage wishes sug¬
gests more than usual motivation. We believe the Osages were successful in
their efforts to acquire more land because they employed their traditional
strategy.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

342 / Final Move
Fixing the Price

In discussing the price the Osages paid for their present reservation, it is
necessary to examine an unratified Cherokee Treaty of 1868 and the Chero¬
kee Treaty of 1866. Our first consideration is Article Sixteen of the 1866
treaty: “the boundaries of each said district to be distinctly marked, and the
land conveyed in fee simple to each of said tribes. . . . ” 12 We must tread
carefully through the maze of terms and treaties to determine the validity
of title. Black's Law Dictionary defines “fee simple” as follows: “An absolute
or fee simple estate is one in which the owner is entitled to the entire prop¬
erty, with unconditional power of disposition during his life, and descending
to his heirs and legal representatives upon his death intestate.” 13 A final point
must be added to the two above. The Cherokee patent of 1838 required the
Cherokee to occupy the Outlet or it would revert to the United States. 14

There is a legitimate reason to question the Cherokee title to the Outlet
in 1870. We must first point out that in 1838 the United States did not have
a clear title to the Outlet. The Osage title was not entirely extinguished
until ratification of the Treaty of 1839. Without reaffirmation after 1839, the
Cherokee patent of 1838 was clouded.

While the United States elected to recognize the validity of Cherokee
ownership of the Outlet in 1868, there is ample reason to question this
recognition. Terms of the Cherokee patent required occupation of the Out¬
let. The Cherokee did not occupy the Outlet in either the Western civiliza¬
tion sense or in the Indian sense of occupation. For a time they occupied it
in the Indian sense in going to and from buffalo hunts. However, this had
been discontinued sometime before 1868. Cherokees never occupied the
Outlet in the Western civilization sense and, therefore, had forfeited the
right of ownership under the Treaty of 1838. However, since the Cherokee
title was recognized by the United States in the unratified treaty of 1868
and to the sale to the Osages, we must assume the title was legitimate.

Insofar as the Osage title to the present reservation is concerned, it is as
sound as the United States and over a century of occupation can make it.
The Osages hold possession in fee simple from the United States’ support of
the Cherokee title. This fee simple document is held in trust by the United
States government.

By far, a more debatable question is how the Outlet lands could increase
in value from twenty-one cents an acre in 1868 to seventy cents an acre in
1873. In the intervening five years, positively no improvements were made
upon the land. It was still totally “wild land.” One can only assume the rise
in cost was politically or socially inspired. Surely, it could not be economi¬
cally justified.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 343

The early price negotiation was concerned with only the Caney Bot¬
toms on either side of the 96th. However, by early 1870, it was decided not
to allow the Osages east of the 96th. Acting under the assumption that the
second survey of the 96th was correct, a second reservation was laid out and
the search for price continued. Since this involved some of the best farmland
in the Outlet, a larger price than twenty-one cents an acre would seem to
be justified. In the spring of 1870, the Cherokee representative would not
reach a price agreement with the Osages. However, he suggested a meeting
with the Cherokee National Council to fix the price. 13

Acting upon this suggestion, the Osage Council appointed a committee
to negotiate with the Cherokee National Council. While the Osages had
dealt with the Cherokee before and knew there would be delays, they were
not prepared for the long drawn out wait imposed by the Cherokee. After a
two-week delay and the prearranged meeting with the Cherokee still did
not materialize, the Osages returned home in disgust. 1,1

Upon the return to the Drum Creek Agency, Gibson wrote to his supe¬
riors recommending that the price issue be submitted to the President, as
provided in the Cherokee Treaty of 1866. On May 27, 1871, the President
set the price of this land at fifty cents an acre. 17 Since this was within the
promises made to the Osages as a condition of removal, the Osages were
content with the Presidential decision. However, the Cherokee were vocal
in their discontent with the decision. These Cherokee protests were un¬
doubtedly influential in raising the final price to seventy cents per acre.

By the fall of 1871, the third survey of the 96° west longitude line had
been completed. The news that the Osage would have to select a third res¬
ervation exploded like a bomb amid the Bureau of Indian Affairs officials.
Not only was the Agency and improvements at Silver Lake lost, but all the
negotiations had to be undertaken for a third time. 18 Judging from the
Euro-American histories of the Osages, the officials braced themselves for a
full-scale Osage war. Yet, the Osage apparently accepted this setback with a
calm demand for more land.

In the final negotiation of price, much the same pattern of delay and final
referral to the President was followed. On February 4,1873, President Grant
fixed the price of the final Osage reservation at seventy cents an acre. 19
Since the Osage portion of this purchase was 1,470,039 acres, they paid
$1,029,041.30 for their reservation. Actually, they bought and paid for the
Kaw portion too, but the Kaw eventually paid the Osages for their portion.

Both the Osages and the Cherokee objected to this price of seventy
cents. The Osages objected because it exceeded the fifty cents an acre prom¬
ised in the Treaty of 1865 and the Removal Act of 1870. Feeling the Outlet
was as valuable as the Kansas lands the Osages sold for $1.25 an acre, the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

344 / Final Move

Cherokee complained also. It should be noted that this Osage price could
have set the price for the entire Outlet.

The end of all the negotiations and payments and also the significance
of how the Osage reservation was acquired are well summed up in the
following quote: “The Osage Indians bought their reservation from the
Cherokee Tribe of Indians, and paid thereof a stipulated amount. With ref¬
erence to their lands and minerals, they are in a different position from most
Indian tribes in the United States, in that they bought and paid for their
lands, while the greater part of the other Indian tribes were settled upon
their lands by the United States government, and given the right of occu¬
pancy and to said lands. A deed from the Cherokee nation to the United
States of America, in trust for the use and benefit of the Osage Indians, was
given on the 14th day of June, 1883.” 20

LEAVING THE OLD HOME

The Osages Leave Kansas

For the Osages, leaving Kansas was a difficult task. So long as they lived,
those involved in the removal often found it necessary to go to Kansas on
business. Many of the new generation born in Oklahoma moved to Inde¬
pendence or Arkansas City, Kansas, as soon as they acquired United States
citizenship. While many boys of the new generation attended military
academies in Missouri, a sizable number of the girls attended Catholic
Academies in Kansas.

The Act of 1870, providing for the Osage removal from Kansas, was barely
signed before the demonstrations of sadness commenced. As the Board of
Indian Commissioners described it, “At dawn on the day after the treaty had
been signed the air was filled with cries of the old people, especially the
women, who lamented over the graves of their children, which they were
about to leave forever. . . . ” 21

It is not without reason that Miner and Unrau selected the Osages as a
prod to the American conscience. Their book, The End of Indian Kansas,
touches on the Osage plight under the sub-heading, And Then There Were
None . 22 Surely the Osages had every reason to detest the Euro-American
intruders of Kansas. After the removal and well into the 1870s, incidents
almost provoked retaliation by the Osages. Only the presence of troops en¬
forcing martial law upon the Osages saved the Kansas border settlements
from Osage war parties.

Yet, there were memories of better days in Kansas. There were those who
dealt fairly with the Osages and most of all there were the Jesuits. It was this
connection of hearts between the Osages and the Jesuits that pushed the
evils aside. In time, the bond of sharing the love of the land healed old hurts.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 345

The actual physical removal of the Osages was accomplished in bits and
pieces due to the fumbling of the government. Certainly, the necessary buf¬
falo hunts also contributed to the irregular removal. Somewhat less than
3,000 Osages left on the fall hunt of 1870-71 after agreement to the Act of
1870 had been reached in late September. Gibson led the remaining 300,
who were mostly those unable to hunt buffalo, to Silver Lake, where they
wintered. 23

Most of the buffalo hunters returned from an exceptionally long hunt in
March of 1871. They left from their Kansas villages and returned to Silver
Lake. In their return from the hunt, the Caney was crossed near where
Hickory Station was later established. Today, it would be near to the Hulah
dam. The three independent Little Osage bands under Strike Axe crossed
the Caney at the Little Hawk Woman crossing one-half mile south of Elgin,
Kansas. They did not go to Silver Lake, but settled on the Pond Creek camp¬
site. The others returned to Kansas to salvage what they could of their pos¬
sessions, but the three independent Little Osage bands never returned to
their old Kansas villages. While a few mixed-bloods came to the new res¬
ervation in 1872, most of the Osage people came in 1871.

In a heavily edited version of an Osage farewell speech, we find a fitting
closing for this topic. A group of Osage men gave a war dance for the people
of Independence, Kansas. After the dance Kon sa Ka ho la, counselor for the
Big Hills, gave this reported speech:

Brothers of the pale faces: I want to make a talk with you. We have
danced for you our last war dance and sung you our last war song.
Many moons ago the Osages were a great nation. Our warriors and
women and children were as many as the stars of the sky, the leaves of
the trees, and the sands of the seashore; now they are merely a handful.

Over these beautiful hunting grounds we have chased the deer, the
bear and buffalo. By the sides of these green groves we have built our
wigwans [sic], danced our war dances and lighted up our council fires.

We love the lands which the Great Spirit gave us long before the pale
faces came across the great water. . . . Now we go away. 24

The New Reservation
The Beginning

Finny sums up the acquisition of the Osage reserve in the following: “The
land the Osages now occupy and own, was purchased from the Cherokee at
70 cents per acre, and was confirmed by Act of Congress July 5 th [it actually
was confirmed in June], 1872. Their Reservation is held not simply by suf¬
frage nor a donation by the government as a hunting ground, but by title in

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

346 / Final Move

fee simple by purchase.” 2 ^ There were, however, some strings attached. First,
the confirmation required that the conditions of acquisition conform as
nearly as possible to Article Sixteen of the Cherokee Treaty of 1866. Sec¬
ondly, the lands were to be confined to the area described. These bounds
were the Kansas line on the north, the 96th meridian on the east, the Creek
nation and Arkansas River on the south, and the Arkansas River on the
west. 26 The third requirement altered these bounds slightly. This require¬
ment was that the Kaw be allowed to select their lands from the northwest
corner of this reserve.

Note that although the Osages bought and paid for their reservation with
their own money, the government holds the deed in trust for the Osages. In
1882, 1890, and 1891 the Osages requested their deed. 27 Other times they
hired attorneys to get possession of their deed. Yet, to this day, the people are
not allowed to hold the deed to their own property.

All the individuals who have tried to reach an accurate count of the
Osages up to 1875 have commented on the difficulty of getting an accurate
count. Isaac Gibson was no exception. In 1873, Gibson reported the popu¬
lation as 3,906. Yet he qualifies the 1873 figure by stating that he believes
the actual figure is closer to 3,500. 28

We may assume the Osage population declined by somewhere between
400 and 1,000 persons in the first year on the new reservation. This would
mean a loss of at least one out of ten persons. Such a loss demands a greater
explanation than the usual comments about the difficulty of taking an
Osage census. The Annuity Rolls of 1878 suggest strongly that the true loss
the first year was closer to the higher figure of 1,083 persons. It would not
be unreasonable to state that one out of four Osages who removed from
Kansas died in the first year.

As we noted earlier, the fall hunt of 1870-71 was an exceptionally long
hunt. That is, it lasted from September of 1870 to March of 1871. This fall
hunt was followed by another exceptionally long hunt that had, in effect,
become the winter hunt. Without a doubt, these earlier hunts were caused
by an extreme food shortage. Intruders had destroyed or stolen the crops of
1870 and 1871. The first crop planted in Indian Territory was planted at
Silver Lake.

We have an account of the fate of that crop: “Having been to much
expense and trouble in procuring a good machine for thrashing and clean¬
ing the crop of wheat harvested by the Osages, from the fifty acres sown in
their former reservation [Silver Lake], I was nonplussed to find that a Chero¬
kee named Joseph Bennett had taken possession of the crop and was thresh¬
ing and wasting it.” 29 Thus, the crop for 1871-72 was lost, and due to the
move there was no other crop. Therefore, the only food available was from

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 347

the hunt and what could be gathered from wild plants. Game of all kinds
was scarce because of over-killing by both Euro-Americans and American
Indians. The same was true of the available wild plants.

Much is made of the government-issued “rations.” However, almost with¬
out fail, these were too little too late. A common assumption is that these
“rations” were gifts of the government. We wish to correct this misconcep¬
tion and point out that not only did the Osages pay for these rations but
they had to work at white man’s work to get them. Thus, they paid for the
rations twice.

Aside from a food shortage and the consequent malnutrition, there was a
housing problem. The wickiup is easily made but it is small, so it was usually
used on the hunt. Intruders had stolen or destroyed the “furnishings” of the
village lodges. Thus, proper lodges were not built until the fall of 1873. Gib¬
son was forcing many full-bloods into cabins.

The traditional Osage did not know how to live in a cabin. A white man
would think a cabin was superior to a wickiup or a lodge, but cabins pre¬
sented many faults. Osages found the white man’s dwelling extremely haz¬
ardous to their health as well as being inconvenient. While most of the
mixed-bloods were accustomed to cabins, the need for haste in construction
produced poorly constructed cabins. This, in turn, caused deaths among the
newborn.

Added to poor nutrition and inadequate housing was growing conflicts
on the Plains. The skirmishes were with other Indians and with Indian-hat-
ing white men. While the losses were not great to the other combatants,
even a slight loss was dramatic among the Osage people. Their margin of
survival was strained already and so each loss aggravated a situation that was
extremely dangerous. Thus, pressures from the expanding Euro-Americans
were eroding away the margin of survival.

Finally, added to the malnutrition, faulty housing, and pressures of ex¬
pansion were the fumbling, graft, and corruption of the government. The
preference given to Euro-Americans lay at the base of the entire Osage
problem. This preference pervaded every aspect of Osage life and their sur¬
vival. All the fumbling, graft, and corruption in Indian Affairs came from
this preference or priority. The Osages and other Indians stood at the end of
the line and got only the leavings. It was a simple case of, I will take all you
have and give you back what I don’t want.

Troubles: Gibson and the Osages

It is not difficult to perceive that the Osages had an abundance of reasons
to be discontented. Even without a ghost from the Drum Creek Treaty to
haunt their harmony, it was predictable that they would exhibit some form

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

348 / Final Move

of rebellion. Gibson was a sincere and, we believe, honest agent to the Osage
people. The Osages’ situation was desperate and severe even with Gibson,
but it could have been much worse without him. Isaac Gibson stood by the
Osages and fought for their rights.

To say the Osages resented the delays, the wasting of their funds, and the
pressure to become “civilized” would be an understatement. In the minds
of the Osages, these and other frustrations could be laid at the door of the
United States government. Since Gibson was the nearest representative of
that government, it was natural that he would become prey to their anger.

The discontent became so great that by June of 1873 the Osages peti¬
tioned for a change back to the Jesuits. In their petition, they give us clues
as to some of their worries: “If we can judge from what we hear in our
private and public councils, our present officers and missionaries are sus¬
pected of seeking self interest and keeping us in the dark. Our large annui¬
ties are partly wasted; they build schoolhouses and other buildings, make
large farms, raise grain, etc.—(For whom?). All this for the benefit of the
Friends, and without consulting our Chiefs.” 30 Almost identical words of
complaint were used against the Board of Commissioner’s Missionaries in
the early 1800s.

One must bear in mind that to the Osage mind houses, barns, shops,
mills, schools, and tilled fields were symbols of an enslaved people. The Old
Osages thought of the white man as a slave to his possessions. All these
things symbolized the efforts to force the Osages into the same pattern of
enslavement. In effect, what frightened the Osages was that they knew that
the old life they loved so well would soon pass away. They wanted to pre¬
serve the old life as long as possible. They had removed to a new area to
escape the very things Gibson was establishing in their midst.

Mixed in with the restlessness encouraged by the passing of their old life
was the Vann-Adair claim. In his efforts to protect the Osages from these
two Cherokee opportunists, Gibson angered the two Cherokees and irked
some Osages. Vann and Adair used the Osage discontent and restlessness to
discredit Gibson, which worked to some degree. 31

Nothing came of the Osage petitions against Gibson, so a delegation of
Osages presented their case against Gibson in Washington on March 31,
1874. A whole series of petitions and counter-petitions followed. Ultimately,
an investigation of Gibson was made to see if he was guilty of a long list
of charges. These charges were: (1) interfering in tribal affairs, laws, and cus¬
toms; (2) partiality in distributing rations and money; (3) discharging em¬
ployees for signing petitions for his removal and in favor of Catholic schools
and missionaries; (4) employing white men when Indians and half-breeds
could do the work equally as well; (5) interference with the religious pre-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 349

dilections of the people and endeavoring to proselytize them to his own
beliefs; and, finally, (6) misappropriating funds.

Although the investigating committee found no evidence of wrongdo¬
ing on Gibsons part, there was ample evidence that all was not well be¬
tween the Osages and their agent. It was probably this factor that caused the
change to a new agent, for any agent without the support of the people he
is leading generates more problems than he solves.

Osage Depredations

Driven by the necessity to obtain food to survive, the Osages no doubt
committed illegal acts. Possibly, some of these depredations were due to cul¬
tural differences, which certainly affected how the acts were viewed. Surely,
in some few cases, they were deliberately committed by resentful young
Osages. Typical of these depredations was the theft of cattle and horses from
drovers on the Chisholm Trail. The drovers were also sometimes victimized
by Osage “tax collectors.” This consisted of a tax on each animal allowed
to continue the northern drive. Usually, one steer was enough to pay the
total “tax.” United States troopers put a stop to this practice, killing an old
nearsighted Osage man in the process. 32

Throughout the fall and winter of 1874-75, the Osages apparently made
use of a cattle herd that had been scattered by a storm. In one of the very
early grass lease arrangements in the reservation, Gibson had leased grass to
the owners of a thousand steers in the late summer of 1874. On November
20, 1874, a severe blizzard scattered this herd, which had been wintering
nine miles south of the Kansas line. It has been estimated that the Osages
took between two and three hundred head of these cattle. 33

While the situation above was an exceptional situation, it does show the
desperate need of the Osages for food. Gibson always placed a man with the
Osages when they left the reservation to hunt on the Plains. This tended to
curb some of their depredations, but they sometimes escaped his scrutiny
and could steal some food anyway. Gibson insisted that his spy see that the
victims were paid immediately and that the sum was deducted from the
violators’ annuity. 34

Gibson s report on the first Osage delegation to Lawrence, Kansas, has a
slightly amusing aspect:

Thy invitation to the governor and chiefs to visit thee at Lawrence,
was regarded by those who had participated in depredations on per¬
sons and properly [sic property ] on the plains as a trap to get them into
prison. The governor and some other leading men could not be in¬
duced to go; fifteen chiefs and head-men consented. This their first

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

350 / Final Move

ride on the cars [railroads], three days’ stay in the city of Lawrence,
visiting the schools, shops, and other places of interest, the plain and
emphatic talk they had from their superintendent in reference to dep¬
redations on the plains, the encouragement they received for good
conduct, made so deep an impression upon their minds that they are
now the principal leaders in their bands in favor of civilization. 35

The second delegation to Lawrence in 1874 was well represented by major
men among the Osage people.

A primary cause for the Osages killing another human on the Plains was
an odd funeral custom. This originated outside the ceremonies conducted
by the Ne ka a Shin Ka (Little Old Men). Believing that the journey to O
Ke sa (Mid-Way), which was the middle of the upper worlds, was a long
lonesome journey, the Osages believed that the presence of another soul
would make the journey easier. 36

It was such a quest that led some young men to kill Es ad da ua, the
prominent Wichita chief. After the killing, the Osages gathered to repel
an expected counter attack from the Wichita. A delegation of thirty-eight
Wichitas came to Pawhuska to seek a settlement for the act. 37 After a great
deal of bickering, the matter was settled for a total of $1,500 worth of gifts.
Such incidents worked both ways since the Arapahoes wounded an Osage
and killed his horse at this same time. Like the Wichitas, the Osages settled
the matter peacefully with the Arapahoes.

The Medicine Lodge Massacre

In his report for 1875, Isaac T. Gibson reported that, in view of the provo¬
cations, the Osages had behaved very well during the past year: “No satis¬
faction has yet been obtained by them for the four men killed at Medicine
Lodge, Kansas, over one year ago, nor for the sixty head of ponies and other
properly [sir property] taken at that time.” 38 On August 7, 1874 a group of
settlers from Medicine Lodge in Barber County had killed these Osages,
who were peacefully returning from a hunt. It was with great difficulty that
Gibson had been able to keep young vengeance-seeking Osages from strik¬
ing the settlers in Barber County, Kansas. 39

The federal government made every effort to hold the state of Kansas
and its citizens accountable for this act of outright murder. However, the
Governor of Kansas protected the murders by mustering them into the mi¬
litia and back-dating their papers. In a long exchange of letters between the
governor and the United States government, the governor maintained that
the murders were militia acting in defense of their area. 40 This was surely
not the finest hour in Kansas history.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 351

Ultimately, the United States government paid an indemnity to the
Osages in lieu of a payment from the state of Kansas: “The Secretary of the
Interior is authorized and directed to pay to the heirs of certain Osage In¬
dians killed while on a hunt on Medicine Lodge Creek, in eighteen hun¬
dred and seventy-three [actually 1874], the balance on hand of the sum of
five thousand dollars appropriated by act approved March third, eighteen
hundred and seventy-seven, ‘to reimburse the Osages for losses sustained, and
in accordance with pledges by their agent,' amounting to two thousand four
hundred and fifty-one dollars and fifty cents, which is hereby reappropriated
for this purpose” (Approved, March 3, 1885). 41 Thus, the Medicine Lodge
Massacre ended, but a curious sequence of events grew out of this incident
in Osage history.

Restlessness among the Plains Indians was not confined to the Osages.
The Cheyenne and other nations were becoming increasingly active on the
Plains. In fact, Gibson had became concerned in 1874 and had sent runners
ordering the Osage hunting parties to return immediately to the reserva¬
tion. It was thought that by removing them from the Plains, the Osages
would not be blamed for the depredations of other Indians. Unfortunately,
the runners had not been able to contact Hard Rope’s party and, thus, they
were caught in the massacre at Medicine Lodge.

Following the Medicine Lodge incident, all Indians in Indian Territory
were confined to their reservations. Thus, in the fall of 1874, the northern
Cheyenne “jumped” the Fort Sill reservation and started on that great trek
so aptly titled Cheyenne Autumn. In their crossing of Kansas, the Cheyenne
threw enough of a scare into Kansans to ease the “big talk” about what they
would do to Indians.

Causes of the Long Hunts

Beside the obvious need for food, there were five basic reasons for the long
hunts of 1870-75. The Medicine Lodge Massacre and the subsequent re¬
striction to the reservation would surely be one reason. Changes in Indian
Office policies, such as making the Osages work for rations bought with
their own money, served to generate both hard feelings and a desire to es¬
cape the reservation problems. Possibly, one of the most upsetting reasons
for spending more time on the hunt was the erection of many buildings.
Very noticeable was the horde of white men and their families who soon
appeared on the reservation. Some of these were authorized employees of
the Agency and licensed traders. However, many were unauthorized farmers
and free-booters drawn by Osage land and annuity payments. Finally, Vann
and Adair, the Cherokee mixed-bloods, were constantly using the Osage
discontent to generate more discontent with Gibson.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

352 / Final Move

The Osages could clearly see that the days of the buffalo were numbered.
They were keenly aware that the way of life they had been heir to was
doomed. It was only a matter of a few years before they could no longer
lose themselves in the labor and excitement of the hunt. Thus, the activities
of Gibson in erecting schools, churches, barns, mills, blacksmith shops, and
agency houses served as reminders of a coming revolution in culture. The
swarms of white men coming into the reservation only served to make life
a bitter experience. Only out on the Plains doing what they did best could
the Osages be happy and contented. Thus, they remained on the hunt be¬
yond the necessity to collect food. They were reluctant to return to the
rapidly changing world that had become their new home.

Most human actions are set off by some particular cause, but like the final
straw on a camels back, the real causes for actions are often both varied and
numerous. In this case, the Osages were facing a catastrophic change that
they did not want to make. While the reasons for the long hunt given above
are immediate manifestations of their reluctance to change, their entire his¬
tory to this point is the real cause for their resistance. But without the some
two hundred years of contact with Western civilization, it is possible that
even the alert, adaptive Osages could not have survived the catastrophe that
struck them. Yet because of the long contact, within a generation the Osages
stepped into the twentieth century as members of Western civilization. For
most twentieth century Americans, it had taken over 3,000 years to become
Westernized. The Osages became Westernized in only two hundred years.

Social and Economic Conditions

For purposes of administration, Gibson divided the reservation into five
districts. Fie called these: (1) The Agency District; (2) The Bird Creek Dis¬
trict; (3) Hominy District; (4) Salt Creek District; and (5) Little Osage Dis¬
trict. Today, these areas would be comparable to the (1) Pawhuska, (2) Barns-
dall, (3) Hominy, (4) Gray Horse-Fairfax, and (5) Boulanger-Bowring areas.
It is interesting to consider the close comparison with various Osage groups
that these divisions include. Using the same numbering order, we find: (1)
The Heart Stays and Thorny Bush people at Pawhuska; (2) Some White
Hair Little Osages at Barnsdall; (3) The Upland Forest people at Hominy;
(4) The Big Hills at Gray Horse-Fairfax; and (5) The three independent
Little Osage bands at Boulanger-Bowring. We must hasten to mention that
these areas and peoples held true only in the 1870s. In less than a decade, the
various groups became so mixed that most of the old distinctions vanished.

In his report of 1875, Gibson was enthusiastic about the progress the
Osages appeared to be making toward his idea of “civilization.” 42 Evi¬
dently, his view of the progress was somewhat enlarged from the facts. Hints

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Final Move / 353

of troubles appear in his complaints about corruption among some Osage
leaders. 43

We would not want to leave an impression that the Osages had made no
steps toward acceptance of Western civilization. What we are trying to sug¬
gest is that the production of food, even if it is produced by Western meth¬
ods, is a poor measure of cultural change. Most of Gibsons report is based
on technological changes, 44 which is understandable, since these are things
easily measured. However, it is the intangible aspects of a culture that are
the heart and soul of the culture. These aspects are not easily measured, but
this neither denies their presence nor importance. Thus, we maintain that
Gibson’s “gains” with the Osages were surface “gains” that did not reach the
heart and soul of Osage culture.

Yet Gibson made a start and set the Osages on a firm basis for survival.
The Jesuit approach was gentle and touched the core of Osage culture. Gib¬
son’s approach was harsh and touched on the physical needs of the people.
We must realize that this dual aspect of cultures is vital to comprehending
how the Osages adapted to Western civilization. They clung to the shreds
of their culture that had been brutally abused by the majority culture. Only
unavoidable aspects of Western civilization were accepted, so this left some
nooks and crannies for the Old Osage culture.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART FIVE

The Road to Accommodation,

1875-1906

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past

INTRODUCTION

Isaac T. Gibson was replaced by a new Osage agent, Cyrus Beede, early in
1876. At this time, the Osages were extremely restless and uncooperative.
Beede reported that “most of them [the Osages] are wild blanket Indians
far from civilized, many of them hardly ready to give up the war dance and
the scalping knife.” 1 During the winter of 1875-76, Gibson became so con¬
cerned about the growing discontent of the Osages that he called for mili¬
tary aid. A detachment of the Fifth Cavalry from Fort Sill spent the winter
in Pawhuska to prevent an outbreak of Osage hostilities. 2

Obviously, Beede looked at the Osages through a different window from
Gibson. The negative descriptions of Beede contrast sharply with Gibsons
positive descriptions. However, on the subject of “civilization,” Beede’s de¬
scription of the Osage change to “civilization” is more realistic than Gib¬
son’s vision.

As explained in the previous chapter, the unrest, rebellion, and vengeance
were brought on by several causes. Beede was witnessing a people who had
reached the limits of their traditional survival methods. A period of synthe¬
sis followed the dissatisfactions of the mid-1870s. That is, between 1875 and
1906, the Osage people managed to blend their culture with Western civili¬
zation. New methods of survival were developed to replace those no longer
useful. Through this and the next two chapters the reader will see the Osage
people changing to the new while still clutching the old culture.

Frank Finney Sr., who knew the Osages well, describes this process dif¬
ferently from the way we have. He touches upon a striking aspect of the
Osage adjustment to Western civilization: “In the time of Agent Beede, the
Osages retained their inborn sense of superiority, were proud to be Indians
and had no desire to model their lives after the white or any other people.
Most of them were satisfied with their way of life and suspicious of any

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

358 / Farewell to the Past

attempts to change it, yet there were a few full bloods who saw changes
were unavoidable and with the mixed bloods were willing to co-operate
with the Government.” 3

No other Indian nation shows such great diversity in adjustment as the
Osage people. To this day, the people range from highly educated profes¬
sionals to individuals who have been lightly touched by the West. This diver¬
sity was probably brought about because of money, which gave the people
a freedom of choice. Thus, the manner of adjustment was left to the indi¬
vidual Osage. Yet, the bond among the people remains. In a manner of
speaking, the Osages are a series of subcultures united by the common bond
of being Osage.

THREADS OF THE PAST
Laban J. Miles

Cyrus Beede did not last very long as the Osage agent because he was too
far away from them in feelings. He was replaced by a much-admired agent,
Laban J. Miles. 4 In his second report, Miles describes the Osages with his
characteristic gentleness of spirit: “The full bloods are almost all blanket
Indians; although quite a number have in years past been educated to speak
English, read, and write, yet we find them with the garb and habits of the
uneducated, and a stranger could scarcely detect them; they all cling tena¬
ciously to their Indian customs and religion, and pride themselves in their
nationality, although they have entirely given up their old hunts, and are
making quite an effort at self-support.” 5 Miles gave an accurate report about
the Osages with the possible exception of the hunting habits. The last big
hunt was the fall hunt of 1876, when over 10,000 buffalo were taken. Dur¬
ing the following six years, the hunts were much smaller. However, in 1880,
which was the year of Miles’s report of no hunting, the Osages took enough
buffalo to satisfy most of their need for meat. After 1880, they made two or
three virtually unsuccessful hunts and never again hunted buffalo.

Money

During the 1880s and up till 1906, the Osages had a better income than the
average in the American society. This income came primarily from two
sources. The first source was from interest on money obtained from the sale
of their lands in Kansas. A second source was money obtained from farming
and grass leases on their reservation. As the tempo of Kansas land sales in¬
creased, the Osage trust fund grew to $8,295,079.69 in 1891, which was
$6,000,000 larger than any other Indian nation trust fund. 6 Grass leasing
grew rapidly all through the 1880s and 1890s. Thus, the Osages were in the
position of receiving larger and larger annuity payments as time for allot-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past / 359

merit approached. Envy by many Euro-Americans in the area caused them
to watch the Osages carefully to see how they used this money. The ten¬
dency was to seek out and stress the wasteful uses and avoid mention of the
constructive uses. The Bureau of Indian Affairs officials were outraged that
these “wild blanket Indians” were economically secure and independent.
This economic status enabled the Osages to avoid most of the Bureau’s ef¬
forts to “civilize” them.

Most people in Osage County, including the young Osages, believe that
the “richest people on earth” description came from the oil annuities. This
description originated with William J. Pollock, who was the Osage agent in
1898. “The Osage Indians are probably the wealthiest people per capita on
earth, owning as they do over 800 acres of land for each man, woman, and
child, and each receiving an annual annuity of over $200 in cash. To illus¬
trate: If an Indian and his wife have eight children, the annual cash income
of the family is over $2,000. They are aristocrats and like all wealthy people,
scorn to perform manual labor.” 7 These sums are almost laughable in terms
of money today. However, one must remember that this was a substantial
income in 1898.

Despite the reckless use of their money, the Osages were not totally care¬
less. They were human and reacted to sudden wealth much as any human
would in a similar situation. Miles wrote in his Commissioner’s Report for
1890, “Much has been written and published the past year about the profli¬
gacy of the Osages. Having known them for many years, and having a per¬
sonal acquaintance with every member of the tribe, I believe they are as
frugal as the average white man would be under similar circumstances, and
they are far more easily controlled, and submit more cheerfully to the laws
that govern them than any other community of my acquaintance. Could
the government but protect them successfully from the evil consequent
upon too close contact with degraded whites their prosperity would greatly
increase.” 8 Miles knew and appreciated the Osage People.

The Osage sense of humor and flair for the dramatic surely generated
many enjoyable tales that gained in extravagance at each telling. One can¬
not deny that a basis for the tales existed, and some were as “wild” as the
exaggerations. Yet, there was a tender, wholesome side to the use the Osages
made of their money. Powwows were frequently given to honor other In¬
dians, and the guests received lavish gifts. Thus, the Osages helped many
Indian people less fortunate than themselves. White men sometimes do not
understand this Indian trait of generosity.

Osage Marriages and Reformers

A matter of great concern to Osage missionaries and agents has been the
Osage marriage customs. There were three facets of Osage marriages that

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

360 / Farewell to the Past

Western civilization disliked. These were marriages of the very young, po¬
lygamy, and multiple divorces. All of these were well established Osage cus¬
toms. However, not all Osages participated in young marriage, polygamy, or
divorce. Others may have practiced one or two of these customs, but it would
have been rare for a single Osage to engage in all three of the practices.

It is possible that marriage of the very young was harmful to the people
as a whole. Yet, if one understands these “young” marriages as the Osages
practiced them, there seems to be no harm to either individuals or the people.
By the yardstick of Western civilization’s morals, one might say such mar¬
riages were morally wrong. However, Osage practice and that of Western
civilization differed where a female child and a male adult were involved.
In Western civilization sex was usually involved, but in the Osage culture
sex was rarely involved.

The very young Osage female was connected with marriage in two situa¬
tions. One was when a man married all the sisters in a family. Almost surely,
the younger sisters would be under sixteen years of age. The other situation
arose when a man married his current brother-in-law’s daughter, that is, the
daughter of the wife’s brother. As a man and his wife or wives matured, a
young wife became desirable to help with the household tasks. Thus, an old
man may have a twelve-year-old wife. In these cases, sex was not necessarily
an object of the marriage. In a few instances a male child and a female child
were married at a very young age, but they each lived with their parents
until they became “newly grown,” that is, in their midteens.

Agent Laban J. Miles commented on a change in the child marriages in
1891: “During the past year among others they have passed a law, with a
heavy penalty, prohibiting the marriage of any citizen under the age of 16,
thus practically breaking up the practice of young marriages, which has
existed for generations.” 9 Miles was speaking about the Osage Council cre¬
ated under the Constitution of 1881. On the twenty-seventh of November
1890, the Council enacted the law Agent Miles was writing about. “Article
IV, Section 34. be it enacted by the national council op the osage nation:
That every person a citizen of the Osage nation who shall take away any
female child a citizen of the Osage nation, under the age of sixteen years,
from her father, mother, guardian or other person having legal charge of her
person, either for the purpose of prostitution, concubinage or marriage, shall
upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment not exceeding three
(3) years, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand ($1,000) dollars, or both.” 1 "

Since this government was suspended, the enforcement lapsed. After the
turn of the century, the BIA took firm action and issued a directive to all
agencies. The problem of polygamy plagued the Osage agents for some time,
although it surely presented no problem to the Osages. Yet, Agent Dorn at-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past / 361

tributed the Osage decline in population to polygamy: “polygamy only ex¬
ists among the Osages to any extent, and I have noticed that they are de¬
clining more rapidly in proportion to their number, than the other tribes
within this agency; and my conclusion is, that [it] is mainly attributable to
their living in a state of polygamy.” 11

Surprisingly, several later Osage agents echoed this same argument against
Osage polygamy. That is, polygamy causes loss of population. No proof
other than that offered by Dorn is given to support this argument. We are
not defending the practice of polygamy, but this argument against it is
flimsy. Osage population loss is directly attributable to white man’s diseases
and a radical decrease in the nutrition levels of the Osage people. These facts
are easily verified.

Without a doubt, the order to require a license for Indian marriage surely
ended the three Osage practices (child marriage, polygamy, and easy di¬
vorce) causing so much stress in the white community. Osage Agent O. A.
Mitscher commented on the effect of the license order upon the Osages in
1901.

The order recently issued by the Indian Office, effective July 1, 1901,
requiring the issuance of a marriage license by the agent to those con¬
templating matrimony is an innovation productive of the best results.
Heretofore a laxity has existed in the marriage relations among the
Indians, for the reason that engagements were made and marriages
contracted without the knowledge of the agent in charge, and often
after the first quarrel husband and wife separated, each going to their
own teepee, after a lapse of a short time (very short in some instances)
to reappear on the eligible list of some Indian match maker. We have
full-blood Osage young men and young women who are not over 25
years old that have been married as many as five times. By giving the
matter attention and impressing them that they could not marry again
without first having obtained a legal separation from their former
spouse, I have succeeded in reuniting several disaffected families dur¬
ing the past year. 12

SIGNS OF CHANGE
Passing of the Buffalo

Between 1875 and 1880, the buffalo rapidly became more difficult to find.
After a half-hearted hunt in 1881, the Osages gave up their traditional grand
hunts, although small hunts continued for a few more years. No stronger
indication of change for the Osages existed than the passing of the buffalo.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

362 / Farewell to the Past

They had been aware of this disaster approaching and were now reluctantly
ready to adjust to the catastrophe that had been waiting for them.

Clearly everyone was aware of the significance of the buffalo when the
time of their passing came. Laban J. Miles wrote in 1879 about this event.
“The Osage number 2,135, °f which 263 are mixed-bloods. All are peace¬
ably located on their present reservation, and have apparently given up the
idea of living by the ‘hunt.’ This change of life has manifested the need of
a material change in the management of their political and civil affairs . . .
I trust that in the near future they may be encouraged and assisted to make
for themselves some simple laws for their individual protection in holding
property, and thus, secure to those that labor, the fruits of their labor.” 13 The
very thing the Osages had feared would happen was now happening. For
two hundred years, the Osages had refused to become Westernized. They
argued that Euro-Americans were slaves to their possessions, especially lands
and other real estate. Now Major Miles was urging that the Osages make
laws to restrict freedom, to protect the possessions of those who were be¬
coming “civilized.”

It is possible that Charles de Montesquieu heard the Osage argument in
1725. In any event, a statement of his mentions what the Osage feared about
“civilization” and what in a dozen years would happen to them. Montes¬
quieu wrote, “The division of lands is what principally increases the civil
code. Among nations where they have not made this division there are very
few civil laws.” 14 In essence, the Osages argued that land and possessions
held in surplus of survival need generated restrictive laws. These laws then
became so numerous that the owner of surplus possessions became a slave
to his possessions. Thus, their greatest fear was the enslavement to civil laws
and the possessions they protected.

It is sometimes said, with a large lump of truth, that the mountain men
were the last free men in the majority culture of the United States. We fault
the statement only because they were not members of the majority culture.
They stood in a culture of their own that tolerated only basic possessions
and basic laws. Each mountain man was a law unto himself and, therefore,
a free man. No Osage was this free, but all Osages were free from possession
enslavement.

The passing of the buffalo imposed severe conditions upon many Osages,
for some time was needed to accept the harsh facts once calamity struck
them. There was a great diversity among the Osage people as the buffalo
faded from their lives. This is brought out in the following contemporary
news item: “Father Ponziglione arrived home Wednesday from a long trip
of 350 miles in Indian Territory. He visited the Osages at their agency at
Pawhuska and found the half-breeds thriving and prosperous, with consid-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past / 363

erable stock and cultivated lands; but the full-bloods, since the buffalo were
driven further away, have had a hard time in obtaining enough to live on
and are really suffering. ‘Lo, the poor Indian.’ ” 15

Dreams

Like many other Indians, the Osages were seeking firm religious ground to
stand upon. Wa Kon ta (The Sovereign Being of the Universe) seemed to
have abandoned them. The great “Messiah Craze” of the early-i890s reached
the Osages in the fall of 1890. During the summer and fall of 1890, rumors
of an Indian Messiah or Christ spread across the West. Although the version
and ceremony varied from tribe to tribe, they all held close to a fundamental
belief.

Basically, the story runs that a northern medicine man had met the
Christian Christ. His face and wrists were scarred, and he spoke of his cru¬
cifixion. Christ explained to the medicine man that the white people had
forgotten all he had taught them. He then taught the medicine man the
dance that white men called the Ghost Dance. Counseling love and kind¬
ness to each other, he promised that the Indian dead would be resurrected
to aid them in ridding their lands of the white man. Youth would be re¬
stored to the “Good Men” and “Good Women.” 16 A dance was required for
six successive days each moon. If Wah Kon ta was pleased, the buffalo and
other game would return. When the day of miracles comes, supposedly the
spring of 1891, the white man would be unable to make gunpowder. The
gunpowder they have would not be able to throw a bullet hard enough to
penetrate the skin of an Indian. New soil and forests would cover the land
and bury the white man and all his possessions. 17

We have always heard that the Osages only danced the Ghost Dance once
at the junction of Salt and Elm Creeks. Mathews gives the location as the
headwaters of Sycamore Creek southeast of Gray Horse. This is undoubt¬
edly the correct location. 18 In any event, the Osages only completed four
days of the six-day dance. Thus, they did not complete the first and only
Ghost Dance they started to dance.

The dance on Sycamore Creek was probably the Osage farewell to the old
life they loved so well. John Wilson was a Caddo medicine man who cham¬
pioned the Messiah movement. From the movement, he created a new In¬
dian religion. His Quapaw disciple, Victor GrifFin, worked with the Osages.
Wilson, or “Moonhead” as the Osages called him, established two fireplaces
at Hominy. Thus, the American Indian Peyote Church was established among
the Osages.

In 1899, William J. Pollock commented on the Peyote: “During the past
year a few of the Osages have acquired the habit of eating the mescal bean,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

364 / Farewell to the Past

which produces delirium, visions, etc. They acquired this pernicious habit
from western Indians, and it has not become a general habit and I do not
think it will.” 19 Pollock apparently either did not know the religious aspects
of peyote use or he elected not to mention it.

Round houses sprung up throughout the reservation and the Native
American Church became well established among the Osages. A general
charter for the incorporation of the Native American Church was granted
by the state of Oklahoma in 1911. 20 The Native American Church still ex¬
ists among the Osages, but many old round houses have vanished. One facet
of the Native American Church is rarely mentioned, that is, the benefits
derived from participation in it. No one knows how many Osages were
saved from the use of whiskey, but there were many. One cannot remain a
member of the Native American Church and drink whiskey. Dr. M. R.
Harrington, Curator of Southwest Museum, Los Angeles, stresses the great
role of peyote in Indian life: “I think the use of peyote and the rites and
teachings accompanying such use have been of great benefit to the Indians
with whom I came in contact during my Oklahoma work. This is especially
true of tribes whose organization and native life was breaking down with
the consequent loss of morale and pride in their racial heritage.” 21 Dr. Har¬
rington spent a great deal of time among the Osages and knew them well.

Fred Lookout also made a significant statement in the same report: “I
cannot see why so-called reformers should attempt to interfere in the reli¬
gious practice of Indians who do not interfere with the white man’s reli¬
gion, and I feel that the Congress of the United States should encourage
Indians to practice the religion that seems to do them most good and has
the proper influences on the younger generation.” 22

Intruders

A Continuing Problem

Intruders continued to be a problem to the Osages until the reservation
was finally opened by allotment. However, in the years following 1875, the
American frontier was drawing to a close. The continuous frontier line had
disappeared and only frontier pockets remained after 1892. Included in the
most significant of these pockets was the Osage nation. To the west of the
reservation lay the last unrestricted free land in United States history.

Here, all the characters of the American West gathered for a final race for
land. Thus, on a day (September 16) in 1893, the land frontier ended. The
good settled in the Outlet, building homes and cities while the bad col¬
lected in the Osage nation. These intruders, especially the outlaw variety,
did not cause the Osages as much trouble as the petty-thieving, poor, white
variety. The outlaws were less of a problem because they used the Osage

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past / 365

nation as a hideout to escape the law officers in the states. Therefore, they
tried to keep on good terms with the Osages, who often hid them from
federal marshals. Judge Parker at Fort Smith, Arkansas, became known as the
“hanging judge” because so many of these outlaws were executed after they
were captured.

Flowever, it would be a mistake to assume the Osages were the only In¬
dians experiencing intruder problems from poor whites and others. The
Commissioners Report for 1879 records that “Intruders have been equally
troublesome on other Indian lands. There is hardly an Indian reservation
within the limits of the United States which has not been subject to their
encroachments. They resort to all kinds of devices and schemes to obtain a
foothold on Indian soil, and offer ready and varied excuses for their contin¬
ued unlawful occupancy of the same.” 23

The Final Gathering

As the end of the frontier neared, the failures and misfits tended to cluster
on Indian reservations in hopes of having one last chance to acquire free or
cheap land. It was unfortunate that the Osage reservation attracted not only
these failures and misfits but also a more dangerous type. These were oppor¬
tunists, that is, gamblers, con men, free-booters, and do-anything-for-money
types.

Some of these characters married Osage citizens and profited hand¬
somely. Carroll H. Potter reports, “It has lately come to my notice that a
large quantity of walnut timber on the reservation has been cut and sold to
parties in the States. This has been allowed by members of the Osage nation.
Steps have been taken to try and stop the evil, but it is very doubtful if it
can be accomplished, so many inducements are offered by outside parties for
this valuable property.” 24 In an old bunkhouse built in this period, the inside
walls of the common room were found to be sheeted inside with rough
sawn, one-inch thick walnut boards. These boards were two feet wide and
twenty-four feet long, and all of it was core wood. That is, there was no
outer layer white wood on the boards. It would take a tree at least three feet
through twenty-four feet above the falling cut to scale out to two feet of
core wood.

As one can readily see, the final intruders were a varied lot. However, the
typical poor white woodsy intruder of the American frontier remained as a
gadfly to the Osages. Miles reports, “The presence of numerous vagabond
white people on the reservation is a detriment to the welfare of the Indian.
Many of them prove to be gamblers or whisky-peddlers, who succeed in
evading the officers until an opportunity offers itself for them to steal a
horse or rob an Indian; and from all I can learn this class greatly increased

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

366 / Farewell to the Past

during the past few years. More stringent measures should be used to rid the
Indian country of this class, and to control those who come in here as farm¬
ers and laborers.” 25

Indian Intruders

It is easy to forget that Indians could be intruders as well as white men. But
Indians were an entirely different type of intruder. From a full-blood view¬
point, these Quapaw, Potawatomi, and other Indians were not intruders.
However, from an Osage-French mixed-blood viewpoint they were intrud¬
ers as much as the white intruders. We must hasten to say that strictly speak¬
ing, these Quapaw were invited by the full-bloods to reside with the Osages
and, thus, they were not intruders. Yet, the mixed-bloods did not invite them
and in this sense they were intruders.

In any event, the Quapaw were present on the Osage reservation and
apparently they caused no problems. Miles writes, “The Quapaws now on
the reservation, about 70 in number, belong to the Quapaw Agency. They
came to this agency many years ago a number of them having married with
the Osages, and are loath to return to their own reservation. They live in
huts they have built for themselves, subsisting by working for their more
fortunate Osage brothers.” 26 Major Miles was familiar with the Quapaw
presence and had reported them much earlier and in greater detail: “The
Quapaws, having many of them connections among the Osages, and in ac¬
cordance with agreement made between the two tribes by which they
should be incorporated with the Osages, came here in the spring of 1879 in
number about 150, leaving, as I learn from them, about 30 on their old res¬
ervation.” 27 It is noticeable that the number of Quapaw was greatly re¬
duced between the two reports.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs refused to allow a merger of the Quapaw
and Osages. So, all but a few families returned to the Quapaw Agency be¬
fore Osage allotment. The Quapaws remaining with the Osages settled on
Quapaw Creek west of Skiatook.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidently, the Osages were aware of the need to radically change their cul¬
ture. Yet, they made only a few slight adjustments to this change before
1880. In other words, the tempo of change in Osage culture was slow and
gradual to 1880. After this date, the tempo of change became almost un¬
bearably rapid.

To escape the rapid pace of change after the passing of the buffalo, many
Osages sought relief in alcohol. Others used a more constructive relief in a

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Farewell to the Past / 367

new religious practice. Although this religion used a drug to ease the impact
of change, it also taught desirable principles for living properly. Regardless
of what one may think of the Native American Church, it did preserve
many fine principles of Osage culture.

Intruders continued to plague the Osages as again they stood in the main
stream of United States’ history. The dramatic closing of the American land
frontier and the end of the “long drive” placed the Osages in the direct path
of the developing West. While they were still trying desperately to cope
with the rapid developments, the Osages entered the twentieth century
standing more in the Osage world of the past than in the two worlds that
were half Osage and half twentieth-century Western civilization.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle

THE LONG DRIVE
New Developments

The American Civil War affected every aspect of life in the United States
during the latter half of the 1800s. Along with other industries, the cattle
industry was deeply affected. Prior to the Civil War, pork was the first
choice of American meat consumers. However, due to wartime shortages,
pork was seldom available. Beef became the most common substitute. After
almost five years of forced beef consumption and the high post-war price
for pork, beef became the meat of first choice by the American consumer.

A serious problem existed in the cattle industry. This was due to two
factors: the great distance between the supply and the demand, and the ex¬
pensive transportation cost of live weight. The latter was solved by Gustavus
E Swift. He was the first to move west to Chicago with his meat-packing
business. At first, he could only ship meat during the winter months, because
the meat spoiled during the warm months. However, Swift hit upon the
idea of cutting ice on Lake Michigan during the winter and using it in
railway cars to preserve the meat in transit during warm weather. Therefore,
he eliminated the shipping of live weight between Chicago and the east.
In doing this, he materially reduced the cost of western beef on eastern
tables.

Yet, the problem of distance between source and demand remained. No
distance is economically impossible to overcome provided cheap transpor¬
tation can be found. It was natural that Texas ranchers would first try the
economical river transportation. Thus, for a time, New Orleans and other
Mississippi ports became shipping points for Texas cattle. However, this did
not prove to be practical because it was far too slow and the cattle lost too
much weight. Because of rancor in the wake of the war, the early post-war

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 369

railroads were passing to the north of Texas. Kansas was about as far south
as the new railroads were coming to Texas. However, the earliest and nearest
railroad terminal was at Sedalia, Missouri.

The Sedalia Trail was the earliest of the long drive trails to be used. From
the Red River north to Sedalia, it followed the old Osage trails. Memories
are short, so this and the next oldest cattle trail to Baxter Springs were
called the East Shawnee Trail instead of the Osage Trail. This trail branched
at Fort Gibson with one fork going to Baxter Springs and the other follow¬
ing the old Osage trail on the left side of the Arkansas to Caldwell, Kansas,
and crossing the Arkansas near Kaw City, Oklahoma. A West Shawnee Trail
followed another Osage trail north from Boggy Depot to Caldwell, touch¬
ing the right bank of the Arkansas at the Salt Fork. The famous Chisholm
Trail ran a few miles to the west of the West Shawnee Trail at the Salt Fork.

The developments by Swift, the railroads, and the long drive solved both
marketing problems of live weight shipping costs and great distance. The
long drive involved a practice that is usually overlooked, yet this practice
was the key to the entire early western cattle industry, including marketing.
Drovers did not drive their herds to the rail heads as depicted in the movies.
They grazed them on the so-called long drive, which should be more accu¬
rately termed the long-graze. That is, they started from Texas with lean hun¬
gry cattle and arrived at the railhead with contented grass-fat market beef.

Most frontier historians correctly give the opening of the Outlet to
homesteading as a cause for ending the long drive. A few historians attribute
it to the fencing of the trails. This is a misconception, for cattle could be
driven from Fort Worth to Caldwell today despite the fences. It was, and still
is, illegal to close a public road with fencing or any other barrier. In fact, in
1935 a trail herd was driven from the Fort Worth area across the Osage and
into the Flint Hills near Eureka, Kansas. 1 Generally, this herd followed
Highway 99. As a child we often mentally used bad language because of the
many gates we had to open between our ranch and town. The road mean¬
dered through open pastures, but gates were placed where the road crossed
a fence line. The point is that the trails were not closed by fencing, but the
grass was fenced by homesteaders and, thus, it was no longer economically
feasible to make the long drive because of the lack of cheap grass.

Origin of Osage Ranching
Taxing Trail Herds

It was during these long grazing drives that the outstanding qualities of the
Osage bluestem was discovered. Cattle not only fattened rapidly on green
bluestem but they also wintered well on the cured bluestem. Thus, by an
accident of geographic location between supply and market as well as an

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

370 / Bluestem and Cattle

exceptional grass, the Osages were in the forefront of the developing west¬
ern cattle industry.

Surprisingly, the Osage entry into the cattle industry was not as the lessor
of grass. A report by Isaac T. Gibson in September of 1875 shows how the
Osages sought to profit from the cattle drives.

During the past year several herds of cattle were pastured on unoccu¬
pied lands west of and contiguous to the Osage reservation, where the
Osages habitually herd their ponies. I have no doubt it is true, as al¬
leged that, the Osages have killed several head of these cattle. Drovers
having authority to herd them should be well paid for such losses. Five
horses were also stolen from a rancher on the cattle-trail, which was
returned to the owners. This summer three families of thriftless, indi¬
gent Osages left the reservation without permission, and located on
the Chisholm cattle-trail, to gain a living by collecting tax of the
drovers. 2

The matter of taxing trail herds caused the Bureau of Indian Affairs a con¬
siderable problem. As we have shown above, the Osage problem was small.
Yet, the Cherokee trail herd tax became such a problem that a court ruling
was made. The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs ruled that the Cherokee
were justified in a tax of ten cents a head for cattle crossing the Cherokee
reservation. The courts, on the other hand, ruled otherwise: “The United
States court in the western district of Arkansas (Judge I. C. Parker), however,
takes a different view of the subject, and holds that a tax imposed by the
Creek nation on cattle passing through their country is a burden laid upon
commerce between the States, the regulation of which belongs to Congress
alone.” 3

Ending the Long Drive

Without a doubt, settlers in the Outlet were the primary cause for ending
the long drive. However, there were two other significant reasons why the
long drive ended. The first of these was the quarantine which prohibited
the driving of southern cattle on Kansas or Missouri soil during the warm
months. Texas cattle were immune to Texas fever, but they carried ticks to
northern cattle that were not immune. Thus, movement of southern cattle
was limited to the cool months when the ticks were inactive.

A second additional cause for the cessation of the long drive was the
construction of southern railways. Two of these, the Southern Kansas Rail¬
way and the Gulf, Colorado, and Santa Fe Railway were especially effective
in ending the long drive. For a time, these railroads carried southern cattle
to a point immediately south of the Kansas state line. They were off-loaded

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 371

and trailed on the Elgin branch of the Chisholm Trail into the Osage res¬
ervation.

It was, largely, the railroads and the boomers to the west that caused
ranching to be established on the Osage reservation. Robert M. Burrell
notes, “Thus, aided by the railroads, a new pattern of cattle movement de¬
veloped. Cattle were loaded in Texas and started on their way to market.
Along the way, wherever grazing land was available, and somewhere south
of the then existing quarantine line, the cattle were unloaded and allowed
to spend several months fattening themselves on grass. Once the cattle had
been fattened, the problem of the quarantine was no longer important, since
Kansas did not prevent the rail passage of cattle going directly to slaughter.” 4

Quarantine

It must be explained that the quarantine did present a problem to the tradi¬
tional Kansas trail towns. This was the problem of trailing cattle on Kansas
soil. While the laws permitted rail passage, they prohibited trailing southern
cattle across the Kansas line during normal marketing months. Thus, Elgin,
Kansas, became the largest Kansas trail town in the 1880s and up to 1907.

Elgin’s southern city limits also served as the northern line of the Osage
nation. A viaduct was constructed over the state line and a dip pit was dug
on the Kansas side of the overpass. One old-timer quipped, “We drove ’em
to the viaduct, they went over the line not across it; we made ’em swim to
Kansas, just to be sure they were not driven across .” Actually, these measures
were legal. The viaduct facilitated the dipping of the reluctant longhorns.
This dipping kept the ticks at an acceptable level under the quarantine law
of 1884. To further comply with the law, a semicircular, stone “quarantine
fence” was constructed around Elgin to prevent fugitive cattle from enter¬
ing any other part of Kansas. The open ends of the semicircle joined with
the Osage nation quarantine fence. 5

All the ingredients for an Osage cattle industry had come together by
1885, and the great Osage grazing region took its place in the history of
cattle ranching in the United States. The time had come for the Osages
to make another contribution to the development of this country. Like
most significant events, this started as a collection of seemingly insignificant
factors.

MADE FOR GRAZING
Ranch Country

At present you can travel for miles and not see a house or an animal
of any kind. An excellent grade of grass grows luxuriantly, doomed to
be consumed by the fall fires. We have here 1,570,196 acres [including

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

372 / Bluestem and Cattle

the Kaw lands] of fine grazing land. It is estimated that to take all the
land together, four acres is a fair estimate needed per head per annum
for horses or cattle. From the best information I can get, there is not
more than 14,000 head of cattle, horses, and mules in the Territory. It
can be easily seen that a very large number of acres of grazing land is
not utilized. There are about 550 farms opened in this nation. They
have under fence for farming (aside from cattle leases) each from 10 to
100 acres. According to the Indian laws each farm is entitled to one-
fourth mile on all sides of that enclosed for cultivation, which is
12,000 acres; the grass utilized in the nation for 14,000 head cattle,
horses, and mules, say 5,600 acres; leaving over 1,000,000 acres of fine
grass that should be leased, which would bring a net income of over
$300,000 per year.” 6

We can see from the foregoing report that the Osage reservation was a
great grazing region and that its potential was recognized. In a later report,
the grazing feature is noted along with the development of good homes by
the Osages: “This country is largely a grazing one, and must continue so for
all time. While the Indians are averse to taking their lands in severalty, yet
they have pride in building up good homes for themselves, and a number of
them have got orchards started.” 7

It must be pointed out that a typical Osage Country ranch has a com¬
fortable headquarters. Usually, these ranches have several small fields avail¬
able, and often orchards are a part of the grounds. While such an arrange¬
ment is locally called a farm, in truth, they are more often the headquarters
for a ranching operation.

Green Grass and Fresh Water

The tempo of grass leasing was not very fast in 1886, but the promise of
more to come was present: “There are but few leases in this nation [the
Osage]. There is a very large territory that could be leased with great profit
to this people, and in my judgement they would thereby be benefited much.
An Indian improves by having intelligent and industrious neighbors; he sees
others have cattle, and the benefits and profits thereon; watches the methods
and is improved thereby. An Indian is a very close observer.” 8 Clearly, Osage
Agent David was trying to make ranchers of the Osages instead of farmers.
Unfortunately, the Indian Office officials in Washington had a mind set on
making farmers of all Indians despite the circumstances. Thus, a series of
restrictive policies were introduced.

These policies made as much sense as trying to make a road runner
(chaparral bird) out of a duck and a duck out of a road runner. They were

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 373

surely not built for the others’ role in life. The Osages were not built to be
farmers, but ranching was something they could easily adapt to. Long after
the Osages had become adept at ranching, the officials were lamenting that
the Osage income was so high that they could not be induced to become
farmers. It is amazing that bad ideas die harder than a good idea.

Osage Agent David had more to say about the Osages and ranching:
“The Indians [Osages] have advanced sufficiently to receive encouragement
in stock raising. This is certainly a stock raising country. Large numbers of
the Indians have ponies and some few have cattle. A great drawback, but not
so great as formerly, to cattle raising is the ‘Order of the Dove.’ Many have
promised if they could be started again in cattle they would not allow them
[to be] taken or used by the order.” 9 The Order of the Dove refers to the
Mourning Ceremony. After three days of preparation and great feasts, a spe¬
cial party leaves for the west. This is, symbolically, the direction of war and
death. Having as their mission the taking of a scalp, the dance of this special
party has often been called a war dance. Agent Miles, with the assistance of
Black Dog, had managed to get the Osages to take only a snip of hair in¬
stead of the entire scalp. This worked well, but occasionally the knife cut¬
ting the snip of hair inadvertently cut into the scalp and a thin strip of scalp
came off with the snip of hair. There was again a feasting after the “hair”
was brought back. It was these feasts that consumed all the available Osage
cattle.

Four years later (1890) a new agent, O. A. Mitscher reported that a total
of 819,934 acres of the reservation was available for grass leases.

Pastures-Under the direction of Special United States Indian Agent
Gilbert B. Pray, the lands of this reservation have been largely thrown
into cattle pastures, each pasture having been carefully surveyed by
competent engineers, and an excellent map of the Kaw and Osage
reservations made, showing the location of 14 pastures on the Kaw
Reservation, with a net acreage of 71,966 acres, and 184 pastures on
the Osage Reservation, with a net acreage of 819,934 acres. These pas¬
tures, on account of their nearness to the cattle markets, their richness
in grass and abundance of clear, clean water, find a ready rental, and
are eagerly sought by the cattlemen of Texas and the West. They are
especially valuable for Texas stock, as they break the long haul from
that State to the markets. 10

It appears from the closing statements that all or almost all the 819,934 acres
of Osage land was under grass lease in 1890. Details of this leasing will be
given in the next topic.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

374 / Bluestem and Cattle
GRASS LEASES
Beginnings
“Sneak Grazing”

The Osages got into the business of grass leasing as a self-protection meas¬
ure. Stockmen on the Osage boundaries were lax about keeping their stock
off the reservation. Thus, they could acquire free grass since the Osages
could rarely get any money for grass consumed by these accidental strays.

A few earlier leases had been made, but in 1883, the leases were put on
long-term and at a fixed rate. In order to erect a barrier to the sneak grazing,
six leases were laid out adjacent to the Osage boundaries. Three of these
were on the north side where the Kansas cattlemen flourished. The other
three were distributed on the south, east, and west boundaries of the reser¬
vation. 11

Altogether, about 350,000 acres were leased for five years at three to
three-and-one-half cents an acre per year. These leases were fenced by the
lessees. With Indian Office approval, the leases were connected with enough
fencing to fence in the reservation. This perimeter fence was patrolled by
the Indian Police to keep the fence in repair and to keep “strays” out. 12

The first of these leases was with Edwin “Ed” Hewins, who was to pay
three-and-one-half cents an acre. The Hewins ranch headquarters was about
six-and-one-half miles west and slightly north of Elgin, Kansas. Eventually,
it was incorporated as the city of Hewins, Kansas. Only a handful of people
live there today but it was a sizable place in its heyday.

These leases might have been fenced, as Major Miles states in his report,
but both the Hewins and Carpenter riders say they were line riders. 13 It is
possible that their job was to keep the cattle spread evenly over the lease, yet
the riders always said their job was to keep the herds separated. However, it
is more likely that Major Miles meant that these fences were erected along
the Osage boundary and not that they entirely enclosed the lease. In sub¬
sequent reports, this seems to be what he meant. In my own memory, fences
and those eternal gates were everywhere.

Renewal

The first leases and most of the subsequent leases carried an option for re¬
newal. Most of the original lessees renewed, but some had been subjected to
great losses in the winter of 1885-1886. Ed Hewins was one of these, but
he partially recouped his losses and again resumed leasing from the Osage.

Losses in winter were mainly due to a practice that has been discontin¬
ued. The old-time cattlemen let the animals winter on their own and tried
to supply them with hay only when the stem-cured grass was snow or ice

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 375

LEASES OF 1893 16

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent

W. E. Stich (K)

25,120

$879.20

George M. Carpenter (K)

92,400

1,029.00

D. S. Green

64,000

2,240.00

Edwin M. Hewins (K)

30,700

1,075.20

lessee M. Pugh (K)

46,000

1,610.00

John Lee (K)

9,000

336.00

Adams, Shafer & Broderick

30,720

1,075.20

Denoya & Pearson

11,520

403.20

1. H. Carney

4,800

168.00

Edward T. Comer (K)

16,320

575.20

Thomas J. Rogers

7,680

268.80

Thomas Leahy

15,360

537.60

John Pappin

5,760

201.60

Virgile Herrard

48,280

1,689.80

G. J. Yeargin

1,600

56.00

S.J. Soldani

25,000

875.00

W. T. Mosier

15,000

525.00

W. H. Connor

16,000

560.00

Frank Lessert

9,600

336.00

Totals

474,860

$14,440.80

Fig. 39. Notice that the lessees are about one-half Osage related and about one-half
are Kansas stockmen.

covered. As the quality of the herds improved, it became the practice to
supplement the stem-cured grass with high protein feed. Thus, the cattle
wintered much better. In the winter of 1885-1886, Hewins saved only
sixty-two head out of a herd of 15,000 cattle. 14

The growth of leases and acreage was rapid. By 1895, the Commissioner
of Indian Affairs could report: “Osage Reservation, Okla.—The last annual
report mentions the existence of thirty-four grazing leases on this reserva¬
tion, each for the period of three years from April 1, 1893, at the uniform
rate of 3 cents per acre per annum, containing a total estimated area of
about 831,188 acres, at an annual rental of $20,091.58. No additional leases
have been executed during the past year.” 15

Growth of Grass Leasing

If we use 1893 as our base year and compare this with the leases in 1898,
we see some interesting differences (see Fig. 39 and Fig. 40). Some of the
names are set in italics to indicate those known to be an Osage mixed-
blood or a white man married to an Osage citizen. Some have probably
been overlooked for lack of information. Those known to be Kansas stock-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

376 / Bluestem and Cattle

LEASES OF 1898 17 ~ ]

Lessee

Annual Rent

Acres

Thomas J. Moore

46,000

$4,600.00

George M. Carpenter (K)

28,000

2,800.00

Virgile Herard

25,280

2,528.00

William R. Whitesedes

28,400

2,840.00

Thomas Leahy

15,000

1,500.00

Adolph C. Stich (K)

20,000

2.000.00

Albert J. Adam (K)

30,720

3,070.00

John Lee (K)

9,000

900.00

Joseph R. Pearson

10,000

1,000.00

Edward T. Comer (K)

16,320

1,632.00

Lorrin B. Moreledge (K) and

Edgar A. Allen

9,600

960.00

Adolph C. Stich (K)

25,120

2,512.00

Green J. Yeargain

2,000

200.00

Thomas Leahy

14,360

1,436.00

Maggie Lawrence (K)

12,000

1,200.00

Mortimer L. Mertz and

George J. Bird

60,000

6,000.00

Mortimer L. Mertz

25,000

2,500.00

James H. Carney

4,800

480.00

Sylvester J. Soldani

20,000

2,000.00

Phillip Beard

7,000

700.00

William J. Leahy

4,000

400.00

Charles N. Prudom

4,000

400.00

Thomas B. Jones

15,040

1,504.00

Totals

431,640

$43,162.00

Fig. 40. The per-acre price has gone up considerably higher than reported in 1893.

men are marked with a (K). Although both lessees and acreage are fewer in
1898 than they were in 1893, clearly grass leases are bringing three times
the income. That is, the income from grass leases was $28,721.20 more in
1898 than it had been in 1893. From this, it is clear that we must make our
growth comparisons in dollars instead of in acres or number of lessees.

In 1900, the number of lessees increased to a total of forty (see Fig. 41).
It is very noticeable that more Osage mixed-bloods were leasing these grass
lands than in an earlier period. The presence of many unknown names in¬
dicates that more Texas cattlemen were leasing direct from the agency in¬
stead of subleasing from mixed-bloods and Kansas stockmen. If true, this
would mean the Texas ranchers were hiring their own cowpunchers to care
for the cattle on Osage grass. In a subleasing arrangement, the person who
subleases out the grass tends to the cattle.

There is a dramatic dip in both the acreage and income between 1898
and 1900. This is partly because the three-year leases made in 1898 had
another year to run. A closer estimate of acreage under lease and annual

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 377

Fig. 41. Most of the unidentified names are undoubtedly from Texas.

grass income would be to add the two years together. Thus, in 1900, there
would have been approximately 596,372 acres under grass lease and this
would have yielded around $58,006 annually. Actually, both figures would
have been larger than this indicates because of overlapping leases from years
for which we do not have the figures.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

378 / Bluestem and Cattle

LEASES OF 1901 19 j

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent

Mertz & Bird

\TTr?

$4,503.99

Wm. S. Fitzpatrick (K)

15.023

2,398.62

Lewis C. Adam (K)

13.100

2,450.25

Wm. T. Leahy

780

117.00

Benj. F. Avant

1,596

159.60

James B. George

800

135.00

James H. Clapp

12,980

8.247.50

Atkin & Brook

6,472

1,978.30

Elizabeth Baylis

1,343

342.46

Woodley & Vance

17,349

4,886.79

Thos. J. Webb

9,740

2,359.80

James H. Carney

4,090

715.75

Irve Ellis

15,200

2,366.60

Prentis Price (K)

920

92.00

Adam & Sharon

15,380

4,078.85

Howard M. Stonebreaker

27,992

7,697.80

Russell & Bevans

31,495

10,096.87

John Pappin

3,774

377.40

Geo. M. Carpenter (K)

53,347

15,128.95

Chas. N. Prudom

9,720

647.00

Thos. Leahy

8,578

880.05

Hargis & Everett

11,652

2,543.82

Thos. P. Kyger

10,580

1.588

Larin B. Morledge (K)

7,208

1.160.49

James H. Gilliland

2,896

600.05

Robert Thomas

10,599

1,749.94

Solomon Mayer

Samuel J. Riddle

2.694

484.92

11,334

1,233.40

Morphis & Price (K)

3,420

513.00

Virgile Herard

23,767.

1,765.95

James C. Stribling

18,900

3.767.95

Charles Jennings

67,977

9,214.30

Eugene Hayes (K)

12,420

2,424.80

The Beginning of the End

Certainly, the totals for 1901 show an incredible gain in grass lease income
(see Fig. 42). $225,951.28 is a sizable sum even in our own inflated times.
However, the annual income was probably nearer to $300,000 a year from
grass leases alone. The Foster Oil Lease was in effect at this time, but it added
very little to the total annual Osage income. If we consider the interest on
Osage trust funds, the annual Osage income must have been almost $600,000
in 1901. The original leases were huge tracts, but as time passed and the price
per acre for grass increased, the size of the leases became smaller.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 379

LEASES OF 1901 (cont.) j

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent

Virgile Herard

4M7

468.70

Rosa M. Hoots

4,745

664..85

Sylvester J. Soldani

19,570

O.T. Word and Ira W. Word

36,072

10,317.33

William F. Smith

5,324

1,357.62

John Collins

12,492

1,591.95

Collins & Wallace

9,492

949.20

Albert Lombard

1,431

157.41

Wm. Watson

1950

292.50

Kate Gorman

2.190

372.80

Timothy J. Leahy

1,240

93.00

Wm. Johnstone

6,956

695.60

Walter Lombard

3,788

568.20

Don C. Sagers

1.922

192.20

Lenora Stewart

2,969

445.35

Wm. T. Mosier

530

79.50

Thos. P. Flanagan

910

191.10

Luther Appleby (K)

4,860

729.00

Joel McGuire

5,747

675.35

John E. Campbell

19,207

2,003.20

Stephen Lessert

319

47.85

Green Yeargain

3,396

509.40

Charles R. Keeler

6,366

477.45

Norris Watkins

5,012

902.16

Thomas L. Rogers

4,933

493.30

Edward S. Brown

3,180

495.96

An twine Rogers

7,889

1,183.35

Mary J. Clawson

1,865

186.50

Lasater & Noble

17.590

5,013.45

Harris H. Brenner (K)

1,636

163.60

Frank De Noya

3,650

547.50

Walter Russell (K)

4,649

1,441.19

Lee L. Russell (K)

31,438

9,403.68

Arthur Rogers

1,439

143.90

Dwight N. Wheeler

5,121

796.11

Totals

727,260

$225,951.28

Fig. 42. Notice the large size of some of these leases. While many of these leases were
large, a trend toward smaller leases than had been made earlier is evident.

Statehood for Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory had become a
definite possibility by 1900. Hence, the Osage Agency tended to enter one
year leases instead of longer term leases. The Cherokee Commission had
already indicated that Osage allotment prior to statehood was necessary and,
therefore, many cattlemen became nervous about making grass leases in the
Osage. This and the fact that Osage national laws permitted fencing of 640
acres by each of its citizens caused a decline of leases through the agency.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

LEASES OF 1904 20

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent

Harris H. Brenner

6,243

$639

Thomas P. Kyger

8,567

910

Charles N. Prudom

4,348

434

Thomas Leahy

1,110

111

Jonathan B. Clawson

9,192

1,919

Virgile Herard

36,188

4,095

William Watson

10,146

558

Luther Appleby

15,684

1,664

Oscar E. Swanson

2,252

675

Robert H. Rowland

7,190

3,774

Solomon Mayer

5.709

2,624

Jas. E. Henderson, Jr.

8,939

4,737

Charles Jennings

5,767

1,158

Frank De Noya

3,350

837

Higginbothan Bros.

10,508

1,811

John M. Hooton

3,468

346

Samuel G. Kennedy

2,699

337

Frank Thompson

633

James J. Quarles

17,772

7,742

John D. Atkin

3,732

1,224

Russel & Vasbinder (K)

9,272

4,166

James M. Slator (K)

8,620

4,810

William K. Hale (K)

9,200

4,830

Vandruff & Townsend

7,354

2,279

Sherman Dudley

886

221

OttomerG. Hugo

1,727

358

Albert Lombard

1,431

228

Kyger & Brown

5,181

518

Louis E. Hogan

800

120

W. Ralph Morledge

973

121

James C. Stribling

8,246

2,473

Eugene Hayes (Kj

19,827

2,401

Earl D. Bailey

1,860

250

James E. Martin

1,696

169

Leslie Claypool

1.348

423

James G. Gilliland

1,216

425

Clement Denoya

1,750

542

George T. Vance

72,519

34,763

John M. Shannon

4,850

2,858

Irve W. Ellis

4,650

799

Ralph H. Harris

10.217

6,845

Leander G. Bishop

8,894

4,096

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 381

LEASES OF 1904 (cont.) |

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent

Wm. H. Kuykendall

~ 7.014

27151

George M. Carpenter (K)

11,257

4,716

Wm. E. Halsell

5,097

764

Jas. L. Borroum

19.348

8,103

Don C. Sagers

4,798

479

Joel D. Sugg

9,743

3,118

Bayley M. Colly ns

4,428

1,328

John Collins

4,956

1,239

Andes H. Murchison

2,919

1,109

Thomas Leahy

3,390

1,017

Samuel C. Tucker

4,468

2,010

Edward S. Brown

830

332

Howard M. Stonebraker

14,735

11,158

Sylvester J. Soldani

24,117

2,357

John E. Campbell

18,967

1,896

Adam & Shaver

26,027

12.431

Timothy J. Leahy

2,570

257

Alfred W. Hoots

883

Totals

513,627

$159,013

Fig. 43. There were a total of sixty lessees in 1904.

By the early-igoos, the Kansas Flint Hills section had developed well enough
within the quarantine restrictions to cut in heavily on Osage grass leasing.

It is evident from these tables of 1904 and 1905 (figs. 43 and 44) that the
fencing laws of the Osage nation were making it attractive for the Osage
mixed-bloods to fence in and avoid renting grass from the agency. This is
shown in the smaller numbers of Osage lessees. There must have been as
many or more cattle in the Osage after 1901 as there had been before that
date. The peak year for shipping cattle from the Elgin loading pens was 1907,
and the bulk of these cattle came from the Osage pastures.

Apparently, the peak year for grass lease income was in 1901. After this
year, the income from grass leases decreased significantly. This could be mis¬
leading, because the tables show only the grass leases made through the
Osage Agency. They do not show the number of acres nor the annual rent
of leases made for areas under fence by Osages. Thus, the decline between
1901 and 1907 was largely due to direct leasing by independent Osage
ranchers. What these tables show so dramatically is the rising trend of leas¬
ing and then the decrease in grass leasing through the Osage Agency. The
Osage ranches have carried between 150,000 and 200,000 cattle annually
since the late-i88os. While the tables from the Commissioner’s Reports
give us the basic information, the Elgin, Kansas, Brand Register gives us
confirming and additional information.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

LEASES OF 1905 2 ' )

Lessee

Acres

Annual Rent|

Louis Adam, Jr. (K)

ca6s»«ir»ret»Bfcc

Louis C. Adam (K)

4,850

2,206.75

Adam & Shaver (K)

1,644

990.50

Charles R. Allen

4,393

1,449.69

Frank Baker

3.110

1,959.30

Brown & Boren

3,390

1,525.50

J.H. Gilliland

1,216

425.60

W.H. Kuykendall

7,014

2,402.30

Thos. Leahy

2,500

625.00

George W. Lewis

633

63.30

J.E. Martin

1.696

186.56

AN. Shaver

12,830

5,164.08

J.C. Stribling

19,254

4,024.80

Don C. Sagers

4,798

479.80

G.R. White

10,899

5,948.87

E.W. Wallace

12,433

6,245.63

Jane Appleby

10,877

1,087.70

J.H. Bond

5,181

518.10

L.G. Bishop

8,213

5,112.20

H.H.. Brenner

1,687

168.70

J.E. Campbell

8,090

809.00 1

Eugene Hayes (K)

3.200

820.00

Ewing Halsell

9,955

2,495.05

C.N. Prudom

6,013

601.30

G.T. Vance

8,971

2,422.17

Stonebraker

15.590

9,599.71

G.T. Vance

10,217

3,269.44

C.W.B. Collyns

4,428

1,107.00

W.T. Leahy

11,637

1,192.79

A. Lombard

1,431

286.20

Joe Price

4.111

431

Prentiss Price

3,874

426.14

R.R. Russell

75,264

40,275.22

Higginbotham Land & Cattle Cc

7,387

2,839.66

Maher Bros.

1,420

142.00

S.J. Riddle

2,057.00

226.27

Frank J. Wootan

1,120

148.40

R.L. Boog Scott

8,057

1,849.49

B.F. Avant

1,596.00

159.60

AW. Hoots

883

93.80

Totals

310,488

$113,125.24

Fig. 44. The table above shows a drastic reduction in grass lease income.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 383

The Santa Fe Railroad kept loading pens at Elgin, Kansas. They hired a
man to keep track of the cattle shipped. This was done with “tally sticks”
while standing at the loading chute. The cattle would be counted by twen¬
ties. A notch was cut in a stick for every twenty. When one lot had been
loaded out, the notches would be counted to determine the total for the lot.
The stick would then be discarded. We are told that piles of these sticks
sometimes accumulated to a depth of one and one-half to two feet deep
during July through September. While not all shippers registered their
brands with the railroad, quite a number did register all brands in their
herds. Isaac Phillips kept the brand register from 1887 to 1897. Keno Vas-
binder kept it from 1897 to 1907. 22

A check through the 126 individual names on the foregoing tables, ex¬
cluding companies, yields information about many of these lessees. 23 With¬
out a doubt, the largest identifiable group of lessees were Osage mixed-
bloods or white men with Osage wives. We could not identify with an
acceptable degree of accuracy the Texas cattlemen. However, approximately
one-half of the unidentified names were probably Texas lessees. The remain¬
ing one-half were either Osage reservation cattlemen living on lease ranches
or Kansas cattlemen.

LEGAL PROBLEMS
The Fenlon Decision

Secretary of the Interior Teller ruled in 1883 that Indian grass leases were
illegal because Congress had not specifically authorized such leases. This
policy was summed up in a letter to Edward Fenlon, who held an Indian
grass lease. This so-called Fenlon Decision did not prevent grass leases from
being made. However, it did remove the United States government and the
Indian governments from any liability arising from the illegal grass leases. 24

Under these conditions, the fees for grazing had to be kept low because
of the open risks involved for the lessee. While the cattlemen did not object
to these low prices, they were vocal against this policy because of the very
real risks inherent in the practice of illegal leasing. The Osages objected to
the policy because they owned their reservation in fee simple and, therefore,
had the legal right to lease their property.

The Dawes Act of 1887

In a well-intentioned effort to hasten the “civilization” of the Indian, Con¬
gress enacted the Dawes Act. Under this act, Indians were compelled to allot
their reservations. The only exceptions were those nations that had treaty

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

384 / Bluestem and Cattle

provisions allowing them to decide when they were ready to allot. This in¬
cluded the five nations and the Osages. Thus, practically all of Oklahoma
Territory and most of Indian Territory were opened to homesteading on
surplus Indian lands after allotment.

This action was severely limiting the grasslands available for even illegal
leasing. Homesteaders quickly fenced in the land and plowed the grass under.
Therefore, the Osage reservation and Cherokee reservations were about the
only available grass between Texas and the packing plants at Kansas City
and Chicago. While Kansas had excellent grass in the Flint Hills, the quar¬
antine regulations limited their use. At this point, about the only difference
between grazing in the Osage and grazing on Cherokee lands was the
higher quality grass in the Osage.

The whole matter of illegal leasing was brought to a climax by a proc¬
lamation of the President made on February 17, 1890:

Now, therefore, I Benjamin Harrison President of the United States,
do hereby proclaim and give notice:

First. That no cattle or live stock shall hereafter be brought upon said
lands for herding or grazing thereon:

Second. That no cattle and other live stock now on said Outlet must
be removed therefrom not later than October 1, 1890, and so much
sooner as said lands or any part of them may be or become lawfully
open to settlement by citizens of the United States. ... 25

From such actions, it can be seen that the homesteaders had more votes
and political power than the cattlemen, and the Indians had no votes. Since
the Outlet included the lands bought by the Osages for their reservation,
this proclamation affected them also. However, the Osages took their argu¬
ment of fee simple ownership to Congress. Hence, they were successful in
getting special legislation enacted which legalized grass leases in the Osage.

Chap. 383. Sec. 3. Provided, That where lands are occupied by Indians
who have bought and paid for the same, and which lands are not
needed for farming or agricultural purposes, and are not desired for
individual allotments, the same may be leased by authority of Council
speaking for such Indians, for a period not to exceed five years for
grazing, or 10 years for mining purposes, in such quantities and upon
such terms and conditions as the agent in charge of such reservation
may recommend, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Inte-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 385

This legislation was added as an amendment to the Dawes Act on February
28, 1891.

Thus, the Osages were probably the only Indians that could legally enter
into grass leases. Please note that the Osages were learning to fight with
some of the tricks used by white men—that is, fighting by using the law
and legislation to achieve victory. While the Osages were jubilant over their
victory, they had no realization of how far-reaching this legislation was to
be. Who could have anticipated that this act would make the Osage far
wealthier than the grass leases that brought about the enactment? Five years
later, in 1896, the Osages entered into the ten-year Foster lease for gas and
petroleum under this amendment to the Dawes Act. By virtue of fee simple
ownership, the Osages are the legal owners of all minerals in Osage County.

It seems the Secretary of the Interior was determined to deprive the
Osages of their victory. He ruled that no cattle could enter the reservation
from below the quarantine line. This circular was issued February 5, 1891,
shortly before final approval of the special Osage legislation. Burrell notes
that “[a]gain the Osage Council sent a delegation to Washington, and this
time they were able to get the restriction . . . removed.” 27 Many lessees
subleased the grass to Texas ranchers. Others restocked from Texas, so the
cattle from below the quarantine line was vital to Osage grass leasing and
ranching.

Probably, an agreement to bolster the quarantine fence and other meas¬
ures to protect the Kansas herds was at the base of this second victory.
A strong wire fence one-quarter mile south of the Kansas line was con¬
structed, replacing earlier, weaker fences. This fence ran from the 96th me¬
ridian to the Kaw reservation. A stonewall quarantine fence was built around
Elgin and joins with this wire quarantine fence. All cattle coming into El¬
gin from the Osage or direct from Texas were dipped to kill the ticks.

The single essential fact to emerge from the Osage experience with grass
leasing was the establishment of the fee simple rights of the people. If the
viewpoint of Attorney General Garlands ruling of July 21, 1885, had stood,
the Osages would not have had either the grass leases or the oil leases. This
ruling states that “whether such title be a fee simple, or a right to occu¬
pancy merely, it is not material; in either case the statute applies. Whatever
the right or title may be, each Indian tribe or nation is precluded, by the
force and effect of the statute from either alienating or leasing any part of
its reservation or importing any interest or claim in and to the same without
the consent of the Government of the United States.” 28 By eliminating the
fee simple title from this ruling, Congress affirmed the right of the Osages
to lease grass and minerals.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

386 / Bluestem and Cattle
TRENDS
Ingredients of Success

History frequently has a sequence of events showing the development of a
particular thing. One of these sequences shows the creation of the Osage
reservation and its relationship to the development of the cattle industry. We
touched upon this matter earlier in this chapter; however, we did not point
out the inter-relationship between the creation of the Osage reserve and its
legal aspects regarding other ingredients in the development of the beef
industry.

The two major forces at work in any historic event are man and nature.
Too often man, in his conceit, looks only at man’s role in history and misses
the effects of nature. Man’s contributions to the development of the cattle
industry were the economic, technological, and political facets. Of these
three, technological and political aspects are the most remote from nature.
Surely, the relationship between the Osages and the government of the
United States has no direct relationship to nature, since it was created by
man. However, the cultural aversion of the Osages to agriculture does carry
more than a hint of natural influence in selecting their reservation.

The geographic location of the Osage reservation between the supply of
beef and the demand for beef was a fact of nature. Likewise, the desirable
grass was a natural product. Technological developments, such as the rail¬
road, were created by man because of the necessity to overcome the nature
of space and distance. Temperature and its effect on slaughtered beef led to
the technological development of the refrigerated rail car.

Thus, from the man-made taste for beef arising from the American Civil
War, we find a sequence of events that revolves around the cattle industry.
Step by step, the necessary ingredients fell into place. Thus, the Osage grass
leasing period became an important step in the development of a major
American industry.

Osage Politics

Associated with the role of the Osages in the development of the cattle
industry was the changing population of the Osages. Generally speaking,
the mixed-bloods favored allotment and the full-bloods opposed it. Thus, so
long as the full-bloods constituted the controlling majority, the grass leases
would be available to the Texas ranchers. 29 We phrased this as a general rule
because we believe this argument is somewhat over stressed. It overlooks
forces that were at work outside the Osage culture.

It is our opinion that a majority of either full-bloods or mixed-bloods

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 387

would have had less effect on allotment than the demands of the predomi¬
nant culture. As a fact of Osage history, control of the Osage government
passed to the mixed-bloods as the last unrestricted free land vanished from
American history. For 286 years (1607 to 1893), the Euro-American people
had free or cheap land available. Now it was gone. The only possible, desirable
cheap land remaining was surplus Indian reservation land. Since the Osage
reservation was so large, it was apparent that even after each Osage was
allotted 160 acres, over 500 acres of surplus land per capita would remain.

With this tempting prize in front of the land-hungry, hopeful home¬
steader, the pressure on the Osage Council to allot was tremendous. Added
to this were the statehood movement and the possibility of becoming an
isolated unrepresented annex to the new state. The mixed-bloods had not
forgotten their bitter experience during the Kansas removal. They were no
more willing than the full-bloods to allot. However, they saw that it would
be forced upon the people and that it was necessary to agree to allotment
in order to have some say in the terms.

Thus, we would attribute the term of the grass lease period as being de¬
pendent on available free land instead of the conflict between full-blood
and mixed-blood. Ultimately, it would not have mattered what the full-
bloods, mixed-bloods, or cattlemen wanted. Facts support the concept that
the homesteaders’ demand for land and pending statehood would have ended
the old-style grass leasing by about 1906, regardless of who controlled
Osage government.

Apart from the term of the grass lease period, the conflict over control of
the Osage government did lead to a change in grass leasing. Article V, Sec¬
tion 5, was passed by the Osage National Council on April 5, 1892, and it
states: “That each family citizen of the Osage Nation is entitled to fence in
one mile square (640 acres) for grazing purposes, and that not more than
three families be allowed to fence together.” 30

In effect, this law created a dual system of grass leases in the Osage na¬
tion. If a man, wife, and three children were all Osage citizens, they could
fence in five sections or 3,100 acres. This could be subleased to a Texas
rancher. At the same time, the agency was leasing grass. Therefore, the indi¬
vidual Osages could lease grass and the agency could lease grass. An increase
in these family leases after 1892 caused a reduction in agency leases. 31

An unfairness was inherent in this mixed-blood-sponsored law. Money
paid for grass in the family fenced leases was paid directly to the family. To
this point, the law was only slightly unfair in that it gave family fencers a
quick lump sum payment. The law became grossly unfair when money from
the agency leases was paid in quarterly payments to all Osages, family fenc-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

388 / Bluestem and Cattle

ers and non-fencers alike. Thus, the mixed-blood family fencers collected
grass lease money twice and non-fencers collected only once in quarterly
payments.

Summary of Trends

Between 1890 and 1900, the Osages obtained the legal right to enter into
lawful leases of their reservation and its resources. During this same time
span, a rapid increase in grass leases is reflected in the records. Four other
developments should be mentioned that are associated with this decade.
There was a noticeable increase in leasing by mixed-bloods and their spouses.
Secondly, the Osage enclosure law caused a shift from agency leases to in¬
dividual leases. Another trend was a shift to outside lessees, that is, a shift
from subleasing from Kansas ranchers to direct leasing by Texas ranchers.
Finally, the large pasture units originally leased tended to become smaller
throughout the 1890s. 32

These trends indicate an Osage contribution to the development of the
American cattle industry. However, this alone would not justify placing
the Osages in a position of importance in the development of the industry.
The single most important factor giving the Osages a place in the history
of the cattle industry is well stated by Burrell: “Because of the quarantine
line north of the reservation, these pastures [Osage Reservation] were also
the northernmost ones open to cattle from the Southwest. Their continued
use helped establish the transient-cattle industry on bluestem prairies.” 33

SEQUEL TO THE PIONEER OSAGE GRAZING
INDUSTRY: THE OSAGE, 1906-1945

Allotment of the Osage surface rights in 1906 virtually ended large-scale
grass leasing. However, the smaller area leases that had developed in Kansas
continued in the Osage. A great difficulty arose from the method of allot¬
ment. First, unlike most Indian nations, the Osages allotted their entire res¬
ervation. This was a departure from the customary 160 acres per capita and
the designating of the remainder as surplus land. Only random, undesirable
shreds of surplus lands became available, and even these lands were in very
small amounts after Osage allotment.

Secondly, Osage surface allotment was allotted in three draws and the
assignment of a fourth tract by uncontested preference. In nearly every in¬
dividual case, the four 160 acre allotments were not adjacent to each other.
Given time, some Osages managed to put their land into one area under one
fence. A few Osages went further and by trading and purchase put together
sizable ranches. Thus, economically sized grazing units were created.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bluestem and Cattle / 389

In the late-i950s, an Oklahoma guidebook could still describe grazing in
the Osage: “In the hills near the city [Pawhuska] are widespread grazing
lands on which as many as 250,000 cattle are pastured in one season. Ap¬
proximately two-thirds of the herds are owned by Osage ranchers. The re¬
maining third is shipped in from Texas and other states, during March and
April, to be fattened for July and August markets.” 34 The best Osage grazing
region is the southern tip of the Grand Osage Prairies, which is called the
Flint Hills in the terminology of today. While the Kansas Flint Hills graze
more cattle than the Osage section, it is probable that Osage County, Okla¬
homa, grazes more cattle than any single county in Kansas.

It would be debatable which state has the largest single ranch, but the
Barnard-Chapman in the Osage, is a sizable ranch. “The Barnard-Chapman
Ranch . . . , which covers 11,000 acres of rolling, prairie hills on which
more than sixteen thousand head of Hereford cattle graze. ... It is said that
there are more grass-fattened cattle shipped from here annually than from
any other point in the United States. Of Osage County’s 1,465,520 total
acres, 1,218,000 acres are in permanent grasslands.” 35 Despite state lines, the
Flint Hills constitute an important factor in producing American beef.

No better conclusion to grazing on the Grand Osage Prairies could be
found than the following:

Pasture leasing, transient cattle grazing, and pasturemen survived the
hard times of the 1930s, resurged during the 1940s, made the transition
to truck transport in the 1950s and early 1960s, and remain important
parts of land use in the Flint Hills today. The Crop and Livestock Re¬
porting Service still issues a ‘Bluestem Pasture Report’ reporting on
rates and progress of leasing pastures in the Flint Hills. The relative
importance of this activity had declined, however. With consumer
tastes having abandoned grass finished beef, and with the cost-price
squeeze having made it simply uneconomical to mature cattle several
years, the function of leased pastures has become to provide feeders for
the lot. 36

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment

CONSTITUTION
Two Constitutions

Upon two different occasions, the Osages tried constitutional government.
The first attempt was on August 31,1861: “a convention of the Osage people
‘assembled at Council Village on the north side of the Neosho river in the
Osage Nation. . . . ”’ 1

Apparently, at least two forces worked against this first attempt at consti¬
tutional government. The most obvious of these two forces was the out¬
break of the Civil War and the consequent turmoil in southeast Kansas. The
white mans war left the Osages with little opportunity to conduct a new
experiment in government.

While the second of the two forces may have been less obvious, it surely
was equally potent in destroying the first attempt at constitutional govern¬
ment. In 1861, the tribal system, gentile system, or clan organization—or
whichever term one prefers to use—was still intact. That is, the Little Old
Men and the Division Chiefs still exerted an effective power among the
people. Without a doubt, the Little Old Men and the Division Chiefs would
seek to destroy this threat to their power.

In simple truth, the Osages were not ready for constitutional government
in 1861. Their tribal government and band governments were functioning
very well, and a switch to a Western-style government could not have been
acceptable by the people. Therefore, some reason outside of the Osage people
must have been responsible for the creation of the 1861 Constitution.

Because the Indian’s traditional governments often prevented the white
man from controlling their leaders, it was customary to force a reorganiza¬
tion of the Indian government. Of course, there were some well-intentioned
Euro-Americans who really believed these reorganizations were beneficial
to the Indians and that they would aid them to become “civilized.”

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 391

Although the Civil War prevented the plans of the Kansas government
from being immediately implemented, the movement to oust the Osage
from Kansas had been under way since 1854. The strong Osage government
made it obvious that the Osages would be a “hard nut to crack.” Therefore,
it would be convenient to set up a constitutional government and, in the
conflict between the traditional government and the new government, it
would be easier to oust them from Kansas. After the Civil War, this was not
as necessary because that conflict had so weakened all aspects of Osage life
that they were somewhat easier to manage. Yet a new reorganization was
introduced by Isaac Gibson, who appointed a governor and council as the
official Osage government.

A second attempt at constitutional government was launched December
31, 1881. Agent Miles describes the formation of this government in his
report of 1882.

In this connection I will speak of the agency government that was
instituted during the winter and spring. At a general council a large
committee was appointed to draft a constitution and some simple laws
for the governing of the nation, they generally taking the Cherokee
law as a guide, which was formally submitted and adopted by the tribe
by ballot, and under its provision they elected a council composed of
members from five districts, a principal and second chief, four sheriffs,
three judges, and other officers were appointed by the chief and ap¬
proved by the council. The council has, since its election, been recog¬
nized by the tribe as having authority to act for the tribe as far as their
laws provide ... I believe the move a good one, and think they should
be encouraged, as it will gradually but surely destroy the old chieftain¬
ship and Indian forms of government. 2

An important distinction between the 1861 Constitution and the Con¬
stitution of 1881 can be found in their origins. In 1861, the origin lay outside
the Osage people and in 1881 it arose from within the Osage people. A gen¬
eration lay between the two constitutions. During the twenty years which
had lapsed between them, many Osage institutions had passed away. Among
these institutions were the Society of Little Old Men and the Division
Chiefs. By 1881, the pressure to remove the Osages from Kansas was no
longer a force against the people. The greatest force against the Osages in
1881 was the desire to “civilize” them. Agent Miles was concerned about
the band chiefs and their influence among the people. His motive for desir¬
ing the demise of these last shreds of traditional Osage government was to
hasten “civilization” of the people.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

392 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

It is sometimes difficult to determine the relationship the Osage govern¬
ment had with the United States. Finney mentions one odd aspect of the
relationship: “There were no laws of the United States to apply to Indians
for their behavior among themselves, and one Indian could kill another with
complete immunity from any punishment by the Federal Government. The
law in force in Indian Country explicitly did not extend to crime commit¬
ted by one Indian against the person or property of another Indian, and was
consistent with the treaties which included pledges that Indians would have
the right to govern themselves without interference from the white man.” 3

It was situations such as this that provided the motive for creating a con¬
stitutional government. With the passing of the Society of Little Old Men
and the Division Chiefs, the band chiefs could not provide the traditional
protections that had always been an Osage birthright. Traditional Osage law
had never included any property protection and dealt only with crimes
against one’s person. With the growing trend in acquiring farming and graz¬
ing claims, property protection was becoming a necessity. Thus, the Consti¬
tution of 1881 was created out of a need and not because of ulterior mo¬
tives of Euro-Americans.

One final motive for adopting a constitutional government should be
noted, that is the problems that were arising with other Indian nations.
While the United States frowned upon and sought to prevent citizens of
one Indian nation from killing citizens of other Indian governments, they
did not claim any enforcement power. The only concern of the United
States government—and one in which they did claim enforcement power
—was to prevent disruption of the peace among the Indian nations. Since
this impaired traditional Osage burial practice and revenge actions, a system
of constitutional law to apply to these problems became desirable.

Crisis in Constitutional Government
Big Brother

A little government pamphlet contains the following gross understatement
of fact: “The history of the Indian Bureau in the latter part of the 19th
century is largely characterized by paternalistic policies.” 4 By 1900, the
BIA was not only the “great father” but also “big brother,” to the Osages.
The truth of this is evident in the suspension of the constitutional govern¬
ment of the Osage people.

The rise of this paternalism and big brotherism toward the Indian per¬
meated American imperialism abroad. It is still this ingrained attitude that
makes the third world nations of today so distrustful of the United States.
The presence of this sense of superiority and of the conviction that the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 393

American culture is better than any other culture is the seed that will prob¬
ably prevent the United States from becoming a leader among third world
nations. Euro-Americans cannot set it aside today any more than they could
in 1900. This attitude probably had its origins in the evolution of Indian
policy, but it was given added impetus because of insular possessions ac¬
quired in the Spanish-American War.

At any rate, the “great father” decided to set aside the Osage constitu¬
tional government. This was an arbitrary decision made within the BIA
with a very questionable authority. The Commissioners reasons for abolish¬
ing, as he termed it, the Osage government was given in his report of 1900:
“The principal causes . . . were: (1) Acrimonious disputes between the two
factions over elections; (2) entire absence of harmony between the Osage
tribal officers and the Indian agent in administration of tribal affairs; (3) the
selection of ignorant men as officeholders; and (4) the profligate use of
moneys received from permit taxes.” 3

If we were to apply the same criteria to recent administrations of the
United States government, it too would be abolished. Surely, the Demo¬
cratic and Republican parties do not run around complimenting each other.
Harmony is a rarity between the United Nations or the Organization of
American States and the United States. Anyone who thinks the recent and
present United States Officers are not ignorant, must be smoking a poppy-
pipe. However, the capping climax is reached when it comes to the expen¬
diture of tax money. At least the Osage government did not spend $300 for
$3.00 ashtrays or spend in four years more than all previous administrations.
When one considers that the Osages did not spend their future genera¬
tions into a vast debt, one has a right to question the suspension of their
government. 6

Seeking Justification

An additional bit of rationalization was added by Osage agent O. A. Mit-
scher in the same report: “The Osage tribal government at present consists
of a chief and assistant chief. By order of the Interior Department the
Osage council of fifteen members and other tribal offices were abolished
during April and May of this year, it appearing to the Department that the
business of the tribe could be more economically and satisfactorily handled
through the agency office.” 7

If economy and efficiency were the primary objective of government,
the traditional Osage government was far superior to governments of the
Western civilization because it cost nothing. A dictatorship is not only
cheaper than a democracy but it is more efficient. The BIA was making

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

394 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

itself the dictator of the Osage people in the name of economy and effi¬
ciency. One must ask, Who derived satisfaction from the new arrangement,
the Osages or the BIA?

Upon examination, the reasons given for the suspension of Osage con¬
stitutional government are flimsy, to say the least. This Osage government
would not have been suspended if such large sums of money had not been
involved. Furthermore, the constitutional government kept the BIA from
having a free hand in managing these funds. Possibly, the Osage exemption
from the Dawes Act and its amendments lay behind the suspension. It was
known that the National Council was opposed to allotment. Allotment was
a necessity from the Euro-American viewpoint, especially with the possi¬
bility of statehood in the near future. Thus, it would be easier to deal with
a government of leaders selected by the BIA. In view of the difficulty en¬
countered with these leaders over allotment, it is a foregone conclusion that
dealing with the Osage National Council would have been more difficult.

INTERIM GOVERNMENTS

Three governments followed the suspension of the Osage national govern¬
ment under the Constitution of 1881. The first of these consisted of a chief
and assistant chief appointed by the agent. As allotment approached, it be¬
came evident to the BIA that some cloak of representative government
must be created for appearance sake. Thus, a second government was created.
An election was held and carefully supervised to see that the right candi¬
dates won. This government, which in effect was created by the BIA, con¬
sisted of a chief, assistant chief, and a council. It was this government that
wrote the Allotment Act of 1906. The third interim government was cre¬
ated by the Act of 1906 to administer the mineral estate. This government
consists of a chief, assistant chief, and an eight member council. It can be
favorably compared with a corporation board of directors.

Since at the time this third government was created all Osages were rep¬
resented, the government was representative, although it was not created by
the Osage people. However, as time passed, more and more Osages were
born and reached maturity without acquiring a vote in Osage government.
Thus, somewhat over two-thirds of the adult Osages have no share in the
only government recognized by the BIA.

In these supposedly enlightened times, it may be shocking to find that
the BIA still will not recognize any Osage government other than that
created by Congress in the Act of 1906. Thus, the Osage people are denied
the right to live under a government of their own creation despite treaty

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 395

guarantees.The fine speeches and stated policies of self-determination touted
by administrations since the end of World War II are so much “hot air” as
far as most Osage people are concerned. It is still more “economical and
satisfactory” to operate through the federally created government than
through a government of the Osage people.

In 1988, an effort was made to reinstate the old constitutional govern¬
ment. At first this too sought to limit the franchise to local Osages and a
specified blood quantum. After a time it became clear that such limitations
could not get enough support to achieve anything. The federal court finally
ruled that the Osage People should be represented by a true people s gov¬
ernment. Thus, an Osage national government was established by a demo¬
cratic process that was supervised by the court. Unfortunately, the 1906
government appealed the decision on the grounds that under the Act of
1906 they were sovereign. The appellate court ruled against the Osage na¬
tional government, and it was disbanded.

Today the 1906 government is the only recognized Osage government.
Many fear that when the last allottee dies, the recognized government will
die with them. While this is possible, some form of BIA government will
probably continue. The big problem is what will happen to the mineral
trust? There is no question that there will be serious litigation in the courts.
Historically, Indians have faced many more losses in the courts than wins.
Where money is involved, the Osages have been fortunate since 1870.
Hopefully, that luck will hold into the future.

ESTABLISHING A ROLL
Mixed-Bloods
Shifting Views

An earlier chapter gave a brief sketch of the Osage mixed-bloods. However,
it did not deal with the shifting views held by the majority culture toward
these children of two cultures. These views have been summed up by one
of the few people to write about the mixed-bloods. The first viewpoint
appeared in the late-iyoos. “With the European presence in America, there
came into existence a people that claimed their descent from both the In¬
dian and the European. By the late eighteenth century, this population served
both as inspiration to philanthropists seeking new approaches for ‘civilizing’
the Indian, and a pawn in the debate between monogenists and polygenists.” 8

Acting upon the belief that mixed-bloods would act as a bridge between
the two cultures, intermarriage was encouraged. “The American Board of
Commissioners for Foreign Missions encouraged its missionaries to take In-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

396 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

dian wives in order to establish closer ties with the tribe and to promote the
cause of Christianity. The Board also found that mixed-bloods were vital
to its missions, where they often acted as interpreters and sometimes even
took over the service in the absence of the missionary.” 9 This action by the
Board of Commissioners was based on a belief that the mixed-blood was
as much European as Indian. It is this idea that has caused so many problems
for mixed-bloods. Congressmen of today are still heavily influenced by this
line of thinking. The confusion arises because of the equation of blood
quantum with culture traits.

Blood quantum is a matter of natural inheritance, while cultural traits
are a matter of acquired tendencies. Thus a full-blood Indian child raised in
the Western civilization would be more “civilized” than a white child
raised in the Osage culture. This becomes especially noticeable among
Osage mixed-bloods when the mother is Osage. In the Osage culture, the
mother is the child’s teacher for the first five to six years of life. The training
of an Osage child is more intensive than preschool training in Western civi¬
lization. Thus, mixed-bloods with Osage mothers may be only one-quarter
Osage by blood quantum but almost full-blood by training. This is the rea¬
son why measuring Indian-ness by blood quantum is so meaningless.

For this same reason, the progress in “civilizing” the Indian advanced at
a snail’s pace. No one likes to admit their “pet ideas” are incorrect. Thus, the
missionaries blamed the Indian for their failure to become “civilized” within
a generation or two: “The decline in Indian population and the Indians’
intransigence in the face of change, despite attempts by missionaries and
philanthropists on their behalf, led even the ‘friends of the Indian’ to ques¬
tion the assumption that Indians could be ‘civilized.’ ” 1(l This same idea was
summed up more directly by the same source. “Attention to the Indian and
the mixed-blood increased after the American Revolution. From then until
the period of Indian removal in the late 1820s and early 1830s, attitudes
towards the Indian and the mixed-blood shifted from a positive belief in
their capabilities and potential for civilization to one of reservation and
finally to discouragement over their lack of progress.” 11

The removal period caused a feeling among those east of the Mississippi
that the Indian was a vanishing race. This was not true, since the Indians had
merely been concentrated west of the Mississippi, primarily on what had
been Osage lands. With the Indians now out of sight, they soon were also
out of mind. Thus, attention was focused upon the slavery issue. 12

It was evident that by the outbreak of the Civil War, the attitude toward
the mixed-bloods was summed up in the hackneyed saying that “half-
breeds adopted the evils of both races and none of the good.” Acting on the
spirit of this thought, the mixed-bloods disappeared from the plans of the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 397

Indian reformers. In their minds, the mixed-bloods ceased to exist as partly
European and became one and the same as full-bloods.

“We Threw Them Away”

For the Osage mixed-bloods, this condition ended with the removal from
Kansas from 1870-1872. The excessive abuse of these people in the removal
forced the American public to recognize the existence of the Osage mixed-
bloods. The majority culture gradually became aware of some of the special
problems faced by mixed-bloods. It is sad that as Euro-Americans moved to
acceptance of these children of two worlds the Osage people moved away
from them. The Osage expression for this action is, “we threw them away.”

With this background, it is easy to see that a variety of legal problems
could also arise for mixed-bloods. This subject of legal rights was especially
significant among the Osages in the 1890s. The basic question involved the
right to share in the tribal estate. Thus, several considerations must be in¬
cluded. A basic problem was to first determine the rights of the father,
mother, or both parents. By using the logic of the child’s rights following
the father or the child’s rights following the mother, a large number of
mixed-bloods could be denied a share in the tribal estate.

The matter of residence also had to be taken into account. Osage full-
bloods argued, with a great deal of merit, that only those who lived among
them and maintained their tribal relationship were entitled to share in the
tribal estate. A nation has a common boundary, shares in a common culture,
and speaks a common language. Thus, citizenship is ordinarily determined
by sharing in these common traits. The common soil argument cannot pre¬
vail in determining Osage citizenship today because the amount of com¬
mon soil is too limited. The language has largely been replaced by Ameri¬
can English, so it too could not prevail as a citizenship requirement. This
leaves only a common sharing of culture and blood as determining factors
of Osage citizenship.

Surely, Section Four of the Dawes Act defined the right of nonresident
mixed-bloods to allotment. Section Six of the same act made such an allot¬
tee a United States citizen. Yet, for an Osage mixed-blood these provisions
are debatable because the Osages were not included in the Dawes Act of
1887.

A third consideration is the admixture of blood. The question revolves
around the point where the Indian blood becomes so minute that the per¬
son ceases to be Indian by blood. Closely related to this is the problem of
citizenship mentioned above.

Adoptions were a very necessary consideration since they were common
among most Indians and among the Osages in particular. Finally, the prob-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

398 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

lem of unilaterally dropping a person from the tribal rolls had to be dealt
with. That is, should the Osages be permitted to drop a person already on
the roll?

From these brief descriptions of the considerations, one can see that es¬
tablishing an Osage roll was no easy matter. The Osage allotment roll was
probably the most contested roll in Indian history. Reasons for this are not
difficult to find, but the predominant reason was pure greed. Nowhere in
Osage history does greed for material wealth so dominate Osage actions.

One may argue that the full-bloods were motivated more by revenge
than by greed—that is, revenge in the sense of depriving whites and mixed-
blood whites of any benefit from Osage allotment. A case could possibly be
made on the basis of political motive. By reducing the roll, the full-bloods
could regain control of the Osage government. However, investigation of
these alternate motives reveal that they too arose from greed for material
gain. Certainly, the Osages had become Westernized to the extent that
greed for material gain had become a part of Osage culture. However, one
must point out that greed was evident in all persons associated with estab¬
lishing an Osage roll.

Roll Qualifications

One of the problems of Osage allotment was the establishment of an accu¬
rate roll. Thus, the question of qualifications for inclusion on the roll became
extremely important. White-Osage mixed-bloods were singled out and re¬
quired to prove the right to Osage citizenship. Indian-Osage mixed-bloods
were not required to prove a right to Osage citizenship, although they could
not legally enter the allotment rolls of more than one tribe.

In August of 1888, Congress enacted a law prohibiting an intermarried
white man from sharing in the annuities or allotment of his wife’s tribe.
However, this did not prevent the wife of such marriage from sharing in the
benefits. By the Secretary’s ruling, this would prevent a child with a white
father and an Osage mother from being placed on the roll. 13 Two later acts
set this ruling aside. The first of these was an act of 1897: “That all children
born of a marriage heretofore solemnized between a white man and an
Indian woman by blood and not by adoption, where said Indian woman is
at this time, or was at the time of her death, recognized by the tribe shall
have the same rights and privileges to the property of the tribe to which
the mother belongs, or belonged at the time of her death, by blood, as any
other member of the tribe, and no prior Act of Congress shall be construed
as to debar such child of such right.” 14

Many contested families were placed on the rolls because of this act. Yet
the traditional Osages continued to believe they were admitted fraudu-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 399

lently. Legally, the sex of a parent could not be used to disqualify a person
for enrollment and, therefore, it was not a qualification. The Allotment Act
of 1906 also set aside any distinction on the basis of sex of the parent.

Surely, there was an Osage blood qualification. While there were un¬
doubtedly debates on blood quantum, no fixed degree of Osage blood was
set. In some contested cases, the question of any Osage blood became an
issue. In one case, a contested person claimed the right to be placed on the
Osage roll because he claimed descent from Pocahontas. While this is an
extreme case, there were people admitted to the roll with even less claim to
Osage blood.

Apparently, a residence or affiliation qualification was required. This un¬
doubtedly was based on a provision in the Constitution of 1881 that said,
“whenever any [Osage] citizen shall remove with his effects out of the lim¬
its of this Nation, and become a citizen of any other government, all his
rights and privileges as a citizen of this Nation shall cease: Provided, Never¬
theless, That the National Council shall have power to readmit by law, to all
the rights of citizenship any such persons who may at any time desire to
return to the Nation, on memorializing the National Council for such read¬
mission.” 15 This qualification raised a great deal of controversy. The depart¬
ment disallowed the removal from the roll of such people. However, gener¬
ally, if the person had enrolled in some other Indian nation, they were
purged from the Osage roll by the department. Yet, several of these ulti¬
mately tried to have their names added to the Osage roll by a special Act of
Congress. 16

Another ruling of the Indian Office permitted some non-Osage persons
to be placed on the rolls. If a person could prove they were on the Osage
rolls on December 31, 1881, it was forbidden to remove them. This date
marks the beginning of the Osage nation under the Constitution of 1881.
Prior to this date, the roll had been purged, but the investigation was not as
searching as it was in 1898-1908.

The Osage Allotment Act of 1906 added a final qualification for admis¬
sion to the final roll. A special provision in the act provides for minors born
after 1906. “That all children born to members of said tribe on and after
the first day of January, nineteen hundred and seven, and before the first day
of July, nineteen hundred and seven, the proof of birth of such children to
be made to the United States Indian Agent for the Osages.” 17 This would
mean that the youngest living Osage allottees would be eighty-two years
old in 1989.

In summary, we find four qualifications for admission to the final Osage
roll. These are: (1) proof of Osage blood in any quantum; (2) either resi¬
dence upon the reservation or some other evidence of continuing citizen-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

400 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

ship and affiliation with the Osage tribe; (3) proof of being on the roll prior
to December 31, 1881; and (4) proof of birth prior to July 1, 1907.

Maybe we should add the information that most of the Osage people
were known to each other. By virtue of this fact, only those who were
doubtful Osages were challenged. In other cases, enough people accepted an
all-Indian mixed-blood to enable them to be placed on the roll without
challenge. Apparently, adopted white persons were barred from the roll and
adopted Indians were admitted. There were probably no more than 300
challenges and of these about half were admitted to the roll. When the total
value of Osage assets, diverted to those with debatable right to be on the
roll, is considered, several million dollars are involved.

This struggle over the roll drove a wedge between two factions of
Osages, the full-bloods and the mixed-bloods. However, these terms are
more than a little deceptive since neither faction was made up entirely of
full-bloods or of mixed-bloods. For the ten years between 1898 and 1908,
this was the single greatest factor against allotment. It all ended in 1908 with
the official acceptance of the final roll. “On April 11,1908, the Secretary of
the Interior approved the tribal roll which contains the names of 2,230 per¬
sons, of whom all but one are entitled to allotments. A white woman [Jane
Appleby] who had resided with the tribe during; most of her life was en¬
rolled for annuities only. A resolution introduced at the last session of Con¬
gress providing for the enrollment of some 37 other persons failed of pas¬
sage, and unless other names are added by Congress the roll will remain as
now constituted.” 18

ALLOTMENT PROBLEMS
Opposition

For many years the Osages, who were themselves exempt from the Dawes
Act, watched the effects of allotment on other Indians. What they observed
verified their own insistence as a condition of removal from Kansas the right
to determine when they were ready to allot. Possibly, no other tribe in the
United States had a greater spread in adjustment to Western civilization
than the Osages. The range was from highly educated Osages to those who
spoke no English.

This great spread in the accommodation range, among other causes, made
the Osage allotment unique in Indian history. The need to merge the desires
of those who were well accommodated and those who were still traditional
Osages led to a new concept in American Indian law. Never before had
American law allowed Indian allotment on the basis of separating the sur¬
face ownership from mineral ownership. The separation concept had evolved

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 401

in the great worldwide gold rushes that started in California. To a great
degree, this idea combined the Western concept of land ownership in sev¬
eralty and the Indian concept of communal land ownership. It was a sincere
effort to reconcile the diverse needs of the two major Osage factions. How¬
ever, the unusual reservation of three Indian Camp areas was closer to the
Indian communal land ownership idea.

Chapman gives seven reasons for Osage opposition to allotment. 19 The
first of these reasons was the large number of dispossessed Potawatomis who
had sold their Dawes Act allotments. Their plight made a deep impression
on the Osages, who had memories of similar cases from their days in Kansas.
Three of the reasons come under the heading of unsettled treaties. These
were: irregularities in payment of interest on trust funds; the use of Osage
money in a civilization fund growing out of the Treaty of 1865; and pay¬
ment for lands in western Kansas.

The purging of the rolls was covered in the preceding section of this
chapter. We cannot agree with Chapmans sixth reason, which claims the
Osages wanted to join the five tribes by becoming the sixth tribe. All our
lives, we have heard old Osages say they were invited to join the five tribes,
but they refused because they feared the loss of their identity as Osages. In
consideration of the Osage view toward the Cherokees, who dominated the
five tribes, we believe what the old Osages said was correct. There can be
no doubt that Chapman s final point is true. The Osages did want to form
an Indian state instead of becoming a part of Oklahoma Territory.

It is customary to explain the pressure to allot by attributing it to the
mixed-bloods. Bill Burchardt points out that “[as] more and more whites
married into the tribe pressure from mixed-bloods and whites became
strong enough to force allotment of the land.” 2 " We have no argument with
such typical statements, except they seem to infer that this was the only
source of pressure. That is, it is convenient to attribute the pressure to the
mixed-bloods, but this is a surface answer that does not get down to the
true source of pressure.

One must bear in mind that both the full-bloods and the mixed-bloods
were motivated by enlightened self-interest. The mixed-bloods were well
aware that allotment would destroy their profitable grass leasing business.
However, they could also see that the United States government, under
pressure from prospective homesteaders and “friends of the Indian,” was
determined to force Osage allotment. This was clearly evident in the actions
of the so-called Cherokee Commission that was pressuring the Osages even
as they were forcing the Cherokee to allot in direct violation of Cherokee
treaties.

A distinction must be made to prevent further misunderstanding. By

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

402 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

1898, there were three distinct groups of Osage-white mixed-bloods. First,
there were those who were traditional Osages, such as James Big Heart who
led the full-blood faction although he was a mixed-blood. Secondly, there
were the old French mixed-blood families that had evolved as an Osage
band. Finally, there were the recent American mixed-bloods (after 1865),
who were rapidly increasing.

Since this latter group married with full-bloods and mixed-bloods alike,
it is difficult to determine exactly where the loyalty of the Osage spouses
was directed. However, the white spouses obviously had more to gain from
allotment than without it. Fortunately, the two mixed-blood groups and the
full-blood element were able to retain some influence in directing Osage
affairs. The old mixed-bloods eventually came to support allotment because
they felt it was better to show support for it and thus gain some say in the
terms. Otherwise, they felt that allotment would be forced upon them, as
was done with the Cherokee, and they would have little voice in the terms.

In this way, a coalition of old mixed-bloods and new mixed-bloods
aligned against traditional mixed-bloods and full-bloods. As it became in¬
creasingly evident that the government was determined to have an Osage
allotment, a working group of full-bloods and the two older mixed-blood
groups evolved. Thus, this group drafted what became the Osage Allotment
Act of 1906.

The Survey Question

The problem of payment for surveys has always been a thorn in the side of
the Osages. While the costs of these surveys have been comparatively mod¬
erate, usually they were made for some other reasons than for the Osage. By
1906, the Osages were well aware that the BIA was generous in authorizing
expenditures from the Osage Trust Fund since there was so much money in
the account. The Osages argued that they had already paid to have their
reservation surveyed and that another survey in 1907-08 was an unjustified
expenditure of their money for the benefit of the newly created Osage
County, Oklahoma. Also, the Osages pointed out that the government paid
for surveys made on other reservations.

In 1871-72, the J. C. Darling survey had laid out quarter sections but had
placed markers only on the section corners. Thus, the reservation was marked
by square mile or 640 acres. 21 For allotment purposes, it was easy enough
for an allottee to locate his 160 acre or quarter sections. Therefore, it seems
evident that the new survey of 1907-08 was not for allotment purposes but
for some other reason. This is especially true since “the necessary surveys
within section lines were left to surveyors of the Allotting Commission.” 22

Despite the Osage protest, the BIA proceeded to authorize the survey:

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 403

“Resurveys .—On October io, 1907, the department directed a retracement
of the exterior township lines and the relocation of section corners along
these lines, and on March 14, 1908, a retracement of the original subdivi-
sional lines of survey, at an approximate cost of $61,289.50. The survey is
now progressing in the field under the direction of E A. Dunnington, to¬
pographer in charge.” 23 From this description, it seems obvious that this
survey was done for the benefit of the government of Osage County and
not for the benefit of the Osages, although they paid the bill. The Indian
Office betrayed their trust responsibility in not defending the interest of the
Osages but also in encouraging the survey. Governmental units, whether
they be national, state, or local units of government, should pay for their
administrative conveniences in Indian affairs. No single ethnic group should
pay general welfare expenses for the benefit of the general population.

Out of seventeen treaties reported for 1865 in Kappler’s Indian Affairs,
Laws and Treaties, only the Osages paid for surveys. 24 Since this was the year
of the last Osage treaty, this should be indicative of the BIA practices. The
current Kappler edition does not go beyond 1904, so we assume this policy
was continued. It would be a safe surmise that the policy was continued and
that the Osages were the only Indians required to pay for both the survey
of ceded lands and lands they purchased. The Osages could well have pointed
out that they had already paid for two surveys of this same area.

Areas Withheld from Allotment

Basically, there were four types of areas within the reservation that were not
allotted. These were: (1) camp and agency reserves; (2) gifts; (3) railroad
right of ways; and (4) townsites. Three camps, which are called Indian Vil¬
lages today, were reserved. These are at Gray Horse, Hominy, and Pawhuska.
The Agency Reserve of today contains three reserves. The Agents residence
and the buildings around it (two acres) are the first of these. Second is the
Osage Boarding School Reserve, which includes the site of the new office
building and museum and former golf course (87+ acres). The last reserve
is called the Reservoir Reserve, which lies west of the Cemetery Reserve
and contains seventeen plus acres.

Some gifts were more in the nature of a priority of choice than a direct
gift of monetary value. The first of these was a forty-acre tract at Gray
Horse, which gave John N. Florer first choice on the tract. The second and
third such “first choices” were extended to the chief and interpreter for the
purchase of their houses in Pawhuska.

The Sisters of St. Francis received two gifts of land. One of these was
sixty acres at the site of St.Johns Boy’s School between Pawhuska and Gray
Horse on Hominy Creek. Another was for 160 acres at the site of the St.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

404 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

Louis Girl’s School. Two cemetery gifts were made, one at Pawhuska (20
acres) and the other at Fairfax (10 acres).

Railroad right of way reserves were two rods (33 feet) wide with depot
areas as large as needed. There were three railroad reserves. The first of these
was 1,367.50 acres reserved to the Midland Valley Railroad Company. A
second reserve of 1,114.09 acres was made for the Missouri, Kansas, and
Texas Railway Company. Finally, the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Rail¬
way Company was given a reserve of 619.49 acres. It should be noted that
each of these companies, especially the Santa Fe, could have later received
additional gifts of land. These land reserves were given to the railroads “for
their use and benefit in the construction, operation, and maintenance of their
railroads.” 25 The reason we have placed “operation” in italics will become
apparent in the next paragraph.

Failure to include an abandonment clause with this gift has caused some
difficulty. In the early-19 80s, the council brought suit to recover these rail¬
road lands. The court of origin ruled against the council recovering these
lands. So far as we know now, the case has not been appealed. The absence
of an abandonment clause possibly threw the court into the necessity of
ruling on the basis of common practice instead of allowing reversion to the
Osage people. In common practice, such abandoned areas usually revert to
the adjacent landowners. It appears that among other things, the right of
way grant was given under a condition of operation and since the operation
has ceased, the land should revert to the Osage people as the party making
the grant. This appears to be a violation of the contract of grant. An aban¬
donment clause was in the Osage draft of the act. One of the few changes
Congress made in the Osage version was to drop this clause as not needed.

There were five town sites reserved from allotment. These were Fairfax,
Foraker, Flominy, Pawhuska, and Bigheart (now Barnsdall). Fairfax, Foraker,
Flominy, and Barnsdall each consisted of 160 acres. Pawhuska was approxi¬
mately 195 acres in area. Each town site was surveyed and laid out in lots,
which were appraised and sold at auction at or above their appraised value.

Under the act of March 3, 1905 (33 Stat. L. 1061), an Osage town site
commission of three members was created. The first member was the Osage
agent who acted as chairman of the commission. A second member was
appointed by the chief of the Osage nation, and the third member was ap¬
pointed by the Secretary of the Interior.

A minor problem arose before the commission began its work. Frank
Frantz, the Osage agent, was a close, personal friend of President Theodore
Roosevelt. Franz had served as Captain in Roosevelts Rough Rider regi¬
ment. Roosevelt appointed Franz as Governor of Oklahoma Territory, and
Franz served two years as the last territorial governor of Oklahoma Terri-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 405

tory. It was thought at the time that Oklahoma Territory would control the
Constitutional Convention and Oklahoma would enter as a Republican
state. However, the two Osage reservation votes and fifteen Indian territory
votes wrecked this idea, and Oklahoma was Democratic when it entered
the Union.

A special agent, William L. Miller, was appointed to look after the Osage
Agency until a regular agent could be appointed. In February of 1906, Ret
Millard, the new agent, assumed his duties. Special agent William L. Miller
was then appointed to the town site commission by the Secretary of the
Interior. Millard was chairman of the commission and Julian Trumbly was
the Osage member of the commission. It is interesting to observe that two
members of the commission were BIA men and only one represented the
Osages. Apparently, the BIA wanted to insure their interest in the town
sites.

ALLOTMENT
Method of Allotting

The Allotment Act of 1906 was drafted by the Osages. This alone would
make the act unusual in Indian history and United States history. Congress
made very few changes in the draft the Osages submitted for its considera¬
tion. The act provided for an equal division of the lands owned by the
Osage people. As a first principle, there were to be no unallocated lands left
over after allotment except small fragments of undesirable lands. In effect,
this indicated that each person on the approved roll would receive some¬
what over 650 acres of land or slightly more than one square mile of area.

However, since land varies greatly in desirability, the first three rounds
were to be in 160 acre parcels. This, at least in theory, gave everyone a fair
chance to acquire the best land on the first selection. Thus, this selection was
called the homestead selection, although any of the three selections could be
chosen as the homestead. The homestead could be neither sold nor taxed
without an act of Congress. All remaining lands could be taxed after three
years and could be sold after twenty-five years had elapsed. Yet, any adult
could petition for a certificate of competency which would permit him to
sell all his lands except the homestead if the certificate was issued by the
BIA. 26

One can readily see that the Osages had given a great deal of thought to
the evils of a Dawes Act type of allotment. They built into their allotment
many devices to protect the people from losing their lands. Despite this, the
Osages, like many other Indians, became to some extent a landless people.
It took longer and required new techniques to make an Osage landless, but

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

406 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

eventually, “emergency” after “emergency” or agency mismanagement parted
land and Osage.

The Allotment Commission was much like the earlier Townsite Com¬
mission, which was organized on August 14, 1906. Only one of the three
members was an Osage. Black Dog had been picked by the government
council, and its duties were to conduct each round of the selection and to
arbitrate disputes.

Prior to passage of the Allotment Act, 1,350 first or homestead selections
had been filed. These were confirmed with passage of the act. Between June
28 and September 28, 1906, five hundred more persons filed their first
choices. By July 6, 1907, the remaining 380 allottees had filed their first
selection. This first round generated many disputes, since it involved the
choice land, and it was on a first-filed basis. Thus, the best land went to those
who filed early. Those who filed later had to substitute their second or third
choice when their first choice was taken by an earlier filer. To avoid this on
the second and third selection, the commission introduced what they called
“the wheel plan.”

March 11,1907, was set as the day to start on the second round selections.
This allowed ample time to discuss the merits of a lottery type of selection
and, thus, to limit the arguments about who filed first. The idea was to draw
names from a wheel or drum and the number of the drawing became the
order of selection. There were many objections to this plan, which was sub¬
mitted by the interpreter, Harry Koh pay. Among these objections was the
question of whether this plan was within the provisions of the Allotment
Act. By an opinion of the Assistant Attorney General, the wheel plan was
ruled to be within the authority of the Allotment Act.

The way was now cleared for the remaining selections to be made by a
modified wheel plan. A number wheel and a name wheel were established.
In one wheel were 2,229 name cards, and numbers from one to 2,229 were
in the other wheel (the wheels were actually barrel churns). A blindfolded
person stood at each wheel and simultaneously drew a number and a name.
Thus the order for selection was determined for the person named on the
name card.

Fifty drawings a day were made until the second and third selections
were completed. These drawings were started on July 8, 1907, at 9:00 a.m.
and the final drawing was completed by June 29, 1908. The fourth round
was by assignment. That is, the commission assigned 160 acres to each allot¬
tee. This left the final or fourth round, which as nearly as possible was equal¬
ized in value by the Allotment Commission. The fifth and final round was
completed by July, 1909. The first selection totaled 354,654.90 acres; the sec¬
ond totaled 355,078.65 acres; and the third came to 355,400.76 acres. These

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 407

first three selections amounted to a total of 1,065,134.31 acres. Including the
179.50 acres of the final round, this gave each allottee approximately 659.51
acres. Apparently, this last selection figure of 179.50 is an average instead of
an actual per capita figure. It seems that approximately 1,470,047.79 acres
were allotted. 27

An interesting sidelight of the Osage allotment is the presence of “locat-
ers” on the reservation. Supposedly, these locaters could assist an Osage to
make the best selection. They claimed to be well informed about which
selections were still available and the relative value of these selections. Par¬
ticularly active in this business was the Osage Land Company. The Allot¬
ment Commission was ultimately given orders to inform each allottee that
more reliable information was available from the Commission at no charge. 28
One should never be surprised at the ways devised to part the Osages from
their money and possessions.

THE DOMAIN IN COMMON
Introduction

The topic above described how the Osage allotment in severalty was done.
Unlike other allotments of Indian assets, the Osages still retained a great
deal of their assets in common after allotment. Allotment in severalty in¬
volved two types of assets. The first of these was the land and surface rights,
which were discussed above. The second type of asset allotted was the mo¬
nies held in trust by the United States government. These funds were accu¬
mulated from treaties and Kansas land sales. Thus, allotment placed all assets,
except the mineral estate, into private ownership by each individual Osage.

This mineral estate was reserved from allotment, and for that reason it is
sometimes called the mineral reservation. While it is customary to think of
the mineral estate in terms of petroleum and natural gas, it is well to re¬
member that it applies to all forms of minerals. A small income is derived
from limestone quarried within the reservation. Lead, zinc, and coal deposits
are known to exist on the reservation, but today s prices do not make these
deposits economically worth mining. Possibly, in time, the view of water as
a mineral, so commonly held in the Far West, will be accepted for applica¬
tion on the reservation.

To administer this mineral estate, which is held in trust by the United
States government, a special Osage minerals government was created. We
must review the background for the Allotment Act of 1906 in order to un¬
derstand the position of this government. The constitutional Osage govern¬
ment created by the Osage people had been suspended (probably illegally)
by the BIA before allotment. A chief and assistant chief were appointed by

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

408 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

the BIA and a few years later a council was elected under guidance from the
BIA. In effect, the election was merely a rubber stamp of what the BIA
wanted. It was this BIA-created council that drafted the Allotment Act. In¬
cluded in the act were provisions to create a minerals council. Evidently, the
intent was to create a means to administer the mineral estate and not nec¬
essarily to replace the constitutional government.

Thus we find a situation where the legally constituted Osage govern¬
ment was quite possibly illegally suspended. While it was still suspended, a
government that could not have been created by the Osage people provided
for allotment and the creation of a government to administer the mineral
estate. At the time of its initiation, every living Osage had one share in the
mineral estate and, thus, had one vote in the election of the mineral council.
At this point one could argue with some truth that the mineral council
represented the Osage people since each Osage had a share or headright.

A problem arose with the passage of time. More and more Osages were
born who possessed no portion of a headright. By virtue of this fact they
had no vote in selection of the mineral council and, therefore, had no Osage
government that represented them. As the numbers of these disenfranchised
Osages grew, the injustices involved became increasingly obvious. Some re¬
cent legislation does give the minerals council a general Osage government
role. However, this violates not only the spirit of policies stated by all recent
administrations but it also violates the spirit of the individual’s relationship
to the state as envisioned by the Constitution of the United States. In effect,
a small minority of Osages are recognized by the United States govern¬
ment while most Osages have been terminated under conditions of ques¬
tionable legality as set forth in United States law and by general policies
applied to other Indian groups.

The Minerals Council

The basic outline for the creation of the Minerals Council is in the Act of
1906. Since that time, some changes have been made by Acts of Congress.
The section dealing with the Minerals Council is a long section of the Al¬
lotment Act, but because of its importance we will quote the entire section
with its court and amendment citations to 1929.

Sec. 9. That there shall be a biennial election of officers for the Osage
tribe as follows: a principal chief, an assistant principal chief, and eight
members of the Osage tribal council, to succeed the officers elected
in the year nineteen hundred and six, said officers to be elected at a
general election to be held in the town of Pawhuska, Oklahoma Ter-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 409

ritory, on the first Monday in June; and the first election for said of¬
ficers shall be held on the first Monday in June, nineteen hundred and
eight, in the manner to be prescribed by the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs, and said officers shall be elected for a period of two years,
commencing on the first day of July following said election, and in
case of a vacancy in the office of principal chief, by death, resignation,
or otherwise, the assistant principal chief shall succeed to said office,
and all vacancies in the Osage tribal council shall be filled in a manner
to be prescribed by the Osage tribal council, and the Secretary of the
Interior is hereby authorized to remove from the council any member
or members thereof for good cause, to be by him determined.

U.S.— U.S. ex rel Brown V Lane, 232 U.S. 598, 58 L.Ed. 748, 34 S.C.
449. (1914.) McCurdy V U.S., 246 U.S. 263, 62 L.Ed. 706, 38 S.C. 289.
(1918.)

Fed.— U.S. V. Aaron, 183 E 347. (1910.) U.S. V Board Commr’s Osage
Co., 193. 485. (1911.) MosierW. U.S., 198 E 54, 117 c.C.A. 162. (1912.)
Amended, Act March 2, 1929, 45 Stat. L. 1478. 29

As noted in the quoted citations, these provisions were amended March 2,
1929 (45 Stat. L. 1478). The elections were changed from every two years
to every four years. In 1947, the council was given a special power: “and the
Osage tribal council may determine the bonus value of any tract offered for
lease for oil, gas, and other mining purposes on any unleased portion of said
land, and such determination shall be final.” 30

Three years later (1950), the council was given the power to determine
the royalties to be paid on minerals produced. Originally, this power had
been vested in the President of the United States. 31 In 1978, extensive re¬
vision of congressional acts relating to the Osages took place, and some
changes were made in the tribal council.

A quorum of five council members was required. The Secretary of the
Interior was authorized to appoint new members of the council when an
unexpired term was vacated. Such an appointee served until the next elec¬
tion. The Secretary of the Interior retained the dismissal power, but he could
use this only after the accused had advance notice and was allowed a defense
hearing.

The final change in 1978 is so important that it must be quoted. “The
tribal government so constituted shall continue in force and effect until
January 1, 1984, and thereafter until otherwise provided by Act of Con¬
gress.” 32 In the same act, the mineral estate was changed from “and there-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

410 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

after until otherwise provided by Act of Congress,” to “in perpetuity.” Two
other paragraphs about supervision of the trust by the United States gov¬
ernment were changed to read the same as the quoted sentence above. From
this, we are inclined to deduce that it is the intent of Congress to continue
the mineral estate into perpetuity but not necessarily the mineral trust and
the Osage government established to administer it.

The distinction between mineral estate and mineral trust must clearly be
understood in order to comprehend the significance of this deduction. The
mineral estate is the Osage ownership of all minerals in the present Osage
County, Oklahoma. Mineral trust refers to the supervision and administra¬
tion of the Osage mineral estate as provided in the Allotment Act of 1906
and its amendments. With this distinction before us, the deduction will be
reworded. Congress has agreed to continue the Osage mineral estate forever,
but it has reserved the right to discontinue or alter the supervision and ad¬
ministration of the mineral estate by the United States government. Thus,
Congress has preserved a flexibility that could permit the reestablishment
of a representative constitutional government for all the Osage people. Such
a government could and should be established without affecting the mineral
trust.

LOOKING BACK

In looking back at the Osages since 1906, some interesting trivia can be
noted. There were thirteen Indian reservations in what is now the state of
Oklahoma. The last of these to be allotted was the Osage reservation. 33 Al¬
though the state of Oklahoma does not recognize Osage County as a res¬
ervation, by virtue of the mineral reservation the federal government recog¬
nizes it as a reservation. This makes the Osage reservation the only existing
Indian reservation in the state of Oklahoma.

Since the allotment to individual Osages, 425,000 acres have passed into
the hands of white men or to some other Indians. 34 A significant statement
was once made by Osage Agent Hall:

Probably nowhere in the Indian country is there to be found a broader
or more varied range in the degree of biological assimilation than can
be found in Osage county.

The cultural pattern closely parallels the biological pattern in range
and variety—from the nonEnglish speaking full-blood to the re¬
fined cultured university graduate—with practically all the profes¬
sions, trades, industries, and vocations represented among members of
the tribe. 35

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 411
INDIAN CITIZENSHIP
Osage Citizenship

Most people of Osage blood who have been born since the closing of the
final roll have always assumed they were citizens of the Osage nation. How¬
ever, some doubt about Osage citizenship exists. Current rulings of the So¬
licitor’s Office make Osage citizens of the descendants of persons on the
final roll. These rulings are based on references in the 1906 act and its amend¬
ments, which refer to descendants and children of allottees. Yet, to date we
know of no specific court ruling on the status of Osage descendants of the
allottees or on the Solicitors opinion.

Hence, the only Osages with undisputed Osage citizenship are the allot¬
tees. In a showdown case, the courts or Congress would undoubtedly see
that the status of the living Osages would be that of an Osage citizen. How¬
ever, at the present time the status of unallotted Osages remains debatable.
Identification cards issued to unallotted Osages do not state they are Osage
citizens. These cards give a census roll number by year and the alleged de¬
gree of blood in the Osage tribe. Nowhere on the card is there the identifi¬
cation of the bearer as an Osage citizen. If the assumption of citizenship by
jus sanguine (by blood) is made, then this violates the Osage concept of jus
solis (by under the sun) or, as this is commonly stated, citizenship by soil. As
was discussed earlier, the Osages required both blood and residence to es¬
tablish citizenship. Therefore, one must question the blood identification as
proof of Osage citizenship. Until a clear statement of Osage citizenship is
established by a clear court decision or a clear act of congress, Osage citi¬
zenship remains a debatable subject.

United States Citizenship

No better review of United States citizenship for Indians could be found
than six paragraphs in a BIA pamphlet, which we quote in its entirety.

Although Indians today have the same rights as other Americans,
acquiring their citizenship was a long and involved process.

The 14th Amendment (1868) to the federal Constitution provided
that all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdic¬
tion were citizens of the United States and of the State in which they
resided. Tribal Indians were excluded, however, from the effect of the
14th Amendment on the ground that, by being born into a tribe
(which was considered a domestic, dependent nation) they were not
born in the United States and therefore, not subject to its jurisdiction
(McKay V. Campbell, 1871).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

412 / Constitutional Government and Allotment

The question of Indian civil rights first became a political issue at
the close of the 19th century when the incongruity of the Indians’
status was brought to public attention through the press.

In 1924, the Indian Citizenship Act was passed. But, even before
that time, about two-thirds of the Indians of the United States had
become citizens either through treaty agreement, special naturaliza¬
tion status naming tribes or individuals, general statutes naturalizing
those who took land allotments, or other special legislation.

The 1924 act stipulated that ‘all non-citizen Indians born within
the territorial limits of the United States were to be declared citizens,’
and provided further that ‘that granting of such citizenship shall not
in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of any Indian to
tribal or other property.’

Even with the citizenship act, Indians did not in all cases attain
the franchise easily. Various State laws enacted from the beginning of
the 19th to the early 20th century disenfranchised them, usually on
grounds of their high degree of tribal sovereignty or because they
were not required to assume the same burdens of citizenships as other
Americans (Indian trust lands being exempt from real property and
income taxes). By 1947, however, the number of States refusing to
permit voting by reservation Indians had declined to two (Arizona
and New Mexico), both of which withdrew their prohibition the fol¬
lowing year. 36

An interesting section can be found in the Dawes Act of 1887. Appar¬
ently while the Osages were exempt from the other sections of the Dawes
Act, they were included in the citizenship provisions. “The effect of this
section, however, is not to exclude from citizenship any member of the
tribes named who may take up his residence in the United States, separate
and apart from his tribe, and adopt the habits of civilized life, but only to
exempt the lands occupied by said tribes, from allotment in severalty under
the act.” 37 Possibly, there were a few Osages that acquired United States
citizenship under this provision, between 1887 and 1921.

However, there were too many stipulations in the citizenship section of
the Dawes Act to allow granting of United States citizenship with Osage
allotment in 1906. Thus, the Osages entered World War I without the ma¬
jority being United States citizens. Because of this war, however, those
Osages who were honorably discharged from the armed services were
granted United States citizenship.

Section Three of an act amending the Allotment Act of 1906 has the
citizenship law that made all Osages citizens of the United States. This

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Constitutional Government and Allotment / 413

was enacted March 3, 1921. Since the wording of this act is significantly
different from other Indian citizenship laws before and after passage of the
1921 act, it will be quoted directly: “Sec. 3. That all members of the Osage
Tribe of Indians are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States, but
this shall not affect their interest in tribal property or the control of the
United States over such property as is now or may hereafter be provided by
law. . . . ” 3h While other citizenship authorizations for Indians have wording
to protect their interests in tribal property, they do not have the inclusion of
the trust role of the United States government included.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

PART SIX

Standing in Two Worlds,

1906-1989

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold

THE BEGINNING
Discovery

The name black gold came from the Osage. Mrs. Rosa Hoots, an Osage
mixed-blood who married a Texas cattleman, was trying to decide on a
name for her new foal and saw a nearby oil well pumping. So the colt was
named Black Gold. Later he won the 1927 Kentucky Derby against unfa¬
vorable odds. Black Gold gave a new term to the American language, com¬
bined the Osage love of the horse with ranching, and tied them to the oil
industry.

The early oil fields were not discovered by the use of scientific instru¬
ments or extensive geological knowledge. In southeastern Kansas and north¬
eastern Oklahoma, surface seeps of petroleum were the clues that led to
discovery. Both the Osages and the Indians that followed them in Kansas
were aware of the petroleum on the surface of the water at a spring near
Iola, Kansas. Other springs in southeast Kansas also gave off petroleum.

Modern uses of petroleum were not known to either the Osages or the
Euro-Americans prior to the nineteenth century. The Osages used it for
frostbite, cuts, sprains, burns, and horse liniment. 1 Euro-Americans first
sought petroleum commercially as a source of lighting oil. Kerosene was a
product of petroleum that was obtained by a simple distillation. Coal oil,
which was derived from coal, had replaced whale oil as a source of lamp oil.
However, the price for both whale oil and coal oil was so high that few
could afford it. Thus petroleum was in demand as a cheap source of lamp oil.

The invention and large-scale sale of the automobile in the late nine¬
teenth and early twentieth centuries created a rapidly growing demand for
petroleum and its products. Thus, as the grass leasing income of the Osages
began to fade away, the income from petroleum and natural gas increased.
As technology created more uses for these hydrocarbons, the demand also

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

418 / Black Gold

increased. Thus, the minerals under the Osage grass returned even greater
sums of money than the grass.

Pipe lines, supply businesses, offices, refineries, and oil field crews col¬
lected in southeast Kansas as the Mid-Continent field opened. Many of
these businesses and people came from the Pennsylvania oil producing area.
The strike of black gold in the old Osage domain was to become the last
great frontier mineral rush in the United States. 2 Possibly the biggest dis¬
covery of all was in the Osage reserve, but by this time the oil business was
well established in southeast Kansas.

Lease ranchers in the Osage disliked the thin scum of oil that often ap¬
peared at springs and coated the stream waters. In the words of Jasper Exen-
dine, a Delaware cowboy, “Oil no good. Make water bad.’’ 3 Having a lim¬
ited use of no commercial value, petroleum seeps were a nuisance instead of
an asset. Yet, George B. Keeler, who rode with Exendine on the day the com¬
ment was made, remembered the incident.

Keeler joined with Johnstone, Frank Overlees, and others in an oil well
drilling venture. These men joined with the Cudahy Oil Company and
hired an Independence, Kansas, drilling company to drill a well in the bend
of the Caney at Bartlesville, Oklahoma. On April 15, 1897, at i, 3°3 feet
they hit oil in the Bartlesville Sand. This was the Nellie Johnstone, the first
commercial oil well in Indian Territory, now the state of Oklahoma. 4 The
site of this well is in present-day Johnstone Park and is well marked. In the
fall of October 28, 1897, a welltwo miles to the west on Butler Creek was
brought in on the Foster lease in the Osage reserve. 3 This was the first suc¬
cessful commercial well discovered in the Osage reserve.

The impact of this well was not as immediate as the effects of the Nellie
Johnstone. Yet it was enough to affect Osage allotment. As a condition of
agreement to allotment, the Osages reserved all mineral rights within the
reservation. This was known as the Osage agreement and the Osages them¬
selves wrote the act. The following testimony by John H. Palmer mentions
this fact: “In 1905 a committee of the Osage People met here in this town
[Pawhuska], and after a session lasting three months, off and on . . . not con¬
tinually—but nearly all the time—what was known as the Osage Agree¬
ment was determined upon. I wrote that Osage Agreement out in long-
hand.” 6 Thus, the Osages protected the future income that was to be derived
from the mineral wealth of their reservation.

The Foster Leases

Edwin Bragg Foster is usually named as the holder of the Foster lease. In
truth, there were three Fosters involved. The family came from Bdiode Is¬
land to Independence, Kansas. Henry Foster, who was an eastern banker,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 419

joined with his brother Edwin and acquired a bank at Independence. They
bought ranches, built railroads, and dabbled in the Kansas oil industry. 7

Through the efforts of John N. Florer and the Osage National Council,
a ten-year lease with the Fosters was signed. James Big Heart and Saucy Calf
signed for the Osages. 8 Henry Foster went to New York City to raise money
but died before the lease was approved by the Secretary of the Interior. 9

Henry’s youngest son, Henry Vernon Foster, became the treasurer of the
newly created Phoenix Oil Company, which had been created to operate
in the Osage. After two slightly successful wells, a series of “dry holes” dis¬
couraged further exploration. The Fosters turned to the marketing problem.
This was eased by a two-inch pipeline to Bartlesville, where it was loaded
in railroad tank cars and sold to the refinery at Neodesha, Kansas. A total of
6,212 barrels were shipped in 1900 and 10,536 in 1901. 1(1

Edwin Foster died shortly after the Phoenix Oil Company and the Osage
Oil Company merged to become the Indian Territory Illuminating Oil
Company (ITIO). H. V Foster then took over the company. Under his lead¬
ership, a much-opposed second ten-year lease was obtained in the Osage. It
was H. V Foster that started subleasing. Hence the Osage grew rapidly in oil
production as the resultant increase in exploration. 11 Between 1906 and
1926, the Osage produced more money than all the combined gold rushes
in American history. 12

By an act of Congress on March 3, 1905, the Foster Lease was extended
for a second ten-year period. At the first of the year in 1909, there were 867
oil wells and 74 gas wells. In six months, the last of June, there were 961 oil
wells and still 74 gas wells. During the same fiscal year, 4,816,462.64 barrels
of oil were produced. 13

This volume of production could never have been marketed by tank cars
alone. Freight charges would have eaten all the profit. On November 16,
1903, the Prairie Oil and Gas Company filed a pipeline application with the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Congress enacted special legislation to al¬
low a pipeline to be laid in the Osage and other Indian Territory areas. 14

Eventually, this line ran from Tulsa and the Southern Osage up through
Bartlesville and Independence, where it linked with other lines. In this way,
Osage oil could reach the East Coast markets by pipeline. The Tulsa-Indepen-
dence section was a six-inch line. At the present time, Osage oil can be
pipelined to the gulf coast, west coast, and east coast.

LEASE SALES
Early Auctions

We knew Mr. and Mrs. (Marie) H. V Foster as a boy, since our home was
only one block away from the Foster home. Mr. Foster disliked being called

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

420 / Black Gold

the “richest man west of the Mississippi.” The Fosters were not showy or
flashy people. Mrs. Foster often took us for a ride in her electric automobile.
We never left the paved alley, but it was a great experience. Because of their
many kindnesses, we find it difficult to believe or write evil about these
people.

With the end of the second Foster lease, a new system for awarding leases
evolved. Available 160-acre tracts were put up for lease at an auction. These
lease auctions are still held quarterly on the Osage Agency Campus. But the
beautiful “Million Dollar” elm tree will never again shade the bidders. Dis¬
ease took the venerable old tree a few years ago and it had to be removed.

At first, the leases were sold by sealed bids. However, it was decided that
selling leases at public auction would be more profitable. Thus, for the Osages
and oil men the lease auctions became a way of life. 15 “Colonel” Ellsworth
E. Walters, the auctioneer, was from Skedee, Oklahoma, in Pawnee County.
Apparently, Walters was a master showman and a shrewd judge of human
character. Everyone should attend at least one Osage lease auction. In the
1920s, Walters and the boom added to the normal excitement. It is with
some shock that one discovers that with the mere wink of the eye or twitch
of a finger a million dollars could be spent. 16

The early oil men spent money casually. When oil man Doheny was
asked by a senator during the Teapot Dome investigation if remitting large
sums in a satchel was not unusual, Doheny replied, “Senator, in the past year
I have remitted several million dollars that way. You must remember Senator
that, the $50,000 I loaned to my old friend, Albert Fall, was no more than
five or ten dollars to the ordinary man.” Oil men who attended the Osage
lease auctions were accustomed to dealing in large sums. In a way, they
seemed to be casual, but one could sense in them the same excitement one
would find in a hunter about to make his first big game kill.

Money to be Made

There was money to be made in the Osage reserve. This fact is evident from
the figures available. As of January 1,1953,16,962 wells had been drilled in
Osage County. At this same date, there were 6,794 producing oil wells and
216 gas wells. Since the discovery of Osage oil, 640,000,000 barrels have
been produced, which is approximately 2 percent of all the oil produced in
the United States. 17 In 1924, the commissioner of Indian Affairs made an
interesting report: “In the Osage Reservation alone 120,000 acres were of¬
fered for oil mining lease, 62,448 acres selling for a grand total of $ 16,457,000.
The outstanding feature in these sales was the recordbreaking prices re¬
ceived for tracts in the famous Burbank pool, one 160 acre tract bringing
$1,990,000, another $1,995,000 and each of several others selling for more

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 421

than $1,000,000. The total revenue to the Osage Indians from oil and gas
leases was $24,670,483.” 18

Famous Men and Companies

Many oil companies started in the Osage, and most of the early oil men
have at some time sat under the million dollar elm and bid their way to a
fortune. The Osage was surrounded by oil cities. Independence in Kansas,
Bartlesville, Ponca City, and Tulsa in Oklahoma sat on the fringes of the
Osage. However, no great oil town developed within the reservation. Barns-
dall (originally Big Heart) once came near to greatness, but time and fate
passed it by.

H. V Foster was one of the few oil men who was born rich. Most of the
others became rich by that odd mixture of “guts and luck.” There was Wil¬
liam G. Skelly, the teamster who founded Skelly Oil Company. Harry Sin¬
clair of Sinclair Oil Company shot his foot off while hunting south of
Bartlesville. With the $5,000 insurance money, he started his oil fortune.
T. N. Barnsdall grew up in the Pennsylvania oil business and set up his B
Square company at Big Heart, which was renamed Barnsdall. George and
Jean Paul Getty made their share of money in the Osage. Profits from Osage
oil lay at the base of the Getty fortune. 19

While most of these oil men eventually clustered in Tulsa, three of the
early Osage operators headquartered elsewhere. Frank Phillips, the barber
turned oil man, settled at Bartlesville along with H. V Foster. Marland, the
Pennsylvania oil man who opened the Burbank pool, settled at Ponca City,
where he established the Continental Oil Company (Conoco).

One sometimes reads or hears reference to “lots” in the Osage. The best
explanation we have seen for these is quoted below.

To come up with a system for designating the subleases ITIO divided
the eastern portion of its blanket lease into three tiers, called “Lots”
or “blocks.” There were 348 of these Lots, each one a half mile wide
north to south and about three and 3/4 miles long east to west, reach¬
ing from the Kansas border on the north to the chocolate-colored Ar¬
kansas River on the south. Lot 1 lay along the Kansas line and the rest
of the blocks were numbered consecutively southward, so that Lots
33, 34, 35, and 36 fell on the western edge of Bartlesville and Lot 116
extended another forty miles south. 211

It was Lot 50 that was so important to the Gettys. This lot netted
$426,000 for them in production and another $120,000 when they sold it.
Frank Phillips on Lot 185 hit his 1,000 barrel a day well within a half mile

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

422 / Black Gold

of the Getty well. This Phillips well was sometimes declared to be a 3,500
barrel a day well. 21

UPS AND DOWNS
Production
Introduction

Between 1906 and 1920, the price per barrel of oil rose from a range of
39^-52^ to a high of $3.00 early in 1920. Natural gas was yielding about
$1,000,000 a year to the Osages. As a matter of some interest and real sig¬
nificance, in 1920, oil wells in the Osage had a life expectancy of over
twenty years. Osage gas wells lasted three times longer than gas wells else¬
where in the Mid-Continent field. 22

The advantages of oil and gas production in the Osage was increasingly
obvious by 1920. Nowhere else in the United States could be found such a
large producing area under one ownership. This meant the leasing in the
Osage was a simple, economical process as compared to other producing
areas. It also meant that a uniform code of conservation could be applied
over a large producing area. Although geological factors made the Osage an
area of low production per well, long-lived wells and conservation practices
prolonged the life of the wells. Thus, the Osages, the producers, and the
nation benefited from the single ownership.

A scarcity of casing pipe and other materials acted as a brake to the drill¬
ing of new wells in the Osage. But in view of the drilling in the Burbank
pool of thirty-five wells in less than six months, the brake of scarce supplies
had only a slight effect. Westside leases (Burbank) 23 ran an average of $504.67
per acre in 1921, while the east side ran $43.29 and acre. 24

Two changes in laws affecting the Osage mineral estate were enacted in
1921. First, a change was made in the number of acres any one entity could
lease. 4,800 acres was the old limit. This was raised to 20,000 acres on the
east-side, but all acreage limits were set aside on the westside. Secondly, on
March 3,1921, Congress extended the Osage Mineral Trust period to 1946.
The price for this extension was to allow the state of Oklahoma to levy a
5 percent gross production tax and an additional county tax of 1 percent
for roads and bridges. 25

Like any mining venture, the production of oil is sensitive to changes in
the economy. However, many other factors are also at work affecting pro¬
duction and profits. Manmade problems such as government regulations and
competition among the producing areas surely affect profit and production.
The Osage producing area is especially vulnerable to government regula¬
tions. Aside from federal and state regulations, the Osage is also affected by

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 423

BIA regulations. Fortunately, these three layers of regulatory agencies can
usually resolve conflicts in regulations. Yet the time required to bring mu¬
tual agreement often allows a great deal of damage to be inflicted. Thus, we
find cycles of ups and downs in profits and production.

Superimposed over the smaller cycles are the larger recession cycles of
the general economy. Osage annuity checks were so small during the 1930s
that they would have been laughable if it had not been so serious. Osages
were not eligible for the New Deal recovery programs and the oil annuity
checks were all they had. However, many Osages did not have even this, and
they were also excluded from any government aid.

The Burbank Field

We humans have a tendency to stress the dramatic because it touches our
imagination. The discovery of the Burbank pool was a classic in the Ameri¬
can drama of a poor boy making his fortune. All the ingredients of the
American ideal of individualism are present, with confidence in one’s own
beliefs leading the way.

“On May 14, 1920, at 2,965 feet, the crew struck an oil sand and pro¬
duced 680 barrels of oil the first twenty-four hours.” 26 Thus, the bringing
in of the Burbank pool’s discovery well has been described. E. W Marland
had assigned the drilling of this well to his Kay County Gas Company
because he expected to strike gas at this site. Since his gas company had no
oil lease, it turned the well over to his Marland Refining Company.

The Burbank soon became one of the top producing areas in the United
States. Oil men came from all over the world to mine the “black gold” of
the pool. In time, the flow pressure dropped throughout the pool and pro¬
duction declined rapidly. It was evident that the Burbank was dying.

Waterflood

On August 5,1947, fifteen oil companies submitted a proposal to the Osage
Council: “In re: Proposal to Unitize Leasehold Interests in that Part of the
North Burbank Field Lying in Osage County Except the Stanley Stringer,
and to Develop the Unitized Area by Water Flooding Involving a Request
for Royalty Reduction under Unitized Operation.” 27 Thus the largest sec¬
ondary petroleum recovery program in the history of the oil industry was
initiated.

We will quote freely from this proposal because of its significance to the
Osage People and to the history of the oil industry. “The North Burbank
Field is about 25 years old. A total of 161 million barrels of oil has been
produced to January 1, 1946, from that part of the field lying within the
proposed unitized area. The field had been subjected to secondary recovery

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

424 / Black Gold

operations since about 1932 in the form of a gas repressuring program
which has been diligently conducted by the Operators over the past fifteen
years.” 28 It is obvious that the gas repressuring was only moderately success¬
ful. The Burbank was doomed to continue its decline unless a more effec¬
tive secondary recovery was introduced. Marginal wells had increased and
these would be plugged unless some means to revive them was developed.

The operators then stated their projections: “we are of the opinion that
the future recovery from the lands herein proposed to be unitized will be
somewhere between 150 and 175 million barrels. . . . will increase . . . pro¬
duction . . . from 24,000 to 32,000 barrels per day, a three to four-fold in¬
crease.” 29 Since we are in a position to speak from hindsight, we can say
these projections were reasonably accurate.

As a final quote from the proposal, the cost should be mentioned. “Water
flooding operations of the size to be engaged in North Burbank are of such
character that once the project is started, it must be continued to the end
without interruption so that, the Operators must commit themselves to an
investment annually of from 4 to 5 million dollars over the period of the
next ten to fifteen years.” 31 ’

It may be of interest to the curious to know who the fifteen operators
were who made such a foresighted proposal. Their names as they appear on
the proposal are as follows:

1. Royal Oil and Gas Company

2. Phillips Petroleum Company

3. Continental Oil Company

4. Magnolia Petroleum Company

5. Cities Service Oil Company

6. Mid-Continent Petroleum Company

7. Ohio Oil Company

8. The Texas Company

9. Gulf Oil Corporation

10. Moore Oil Company

11. Skelly Oil Company

12. Devonian Oil Company

13. N. Appleman Oil Company

14. Sinclair Prairie Oil Company

15. Kewanee Oil Company

Some of these companies are better known than others. Yet all the compa¬
nies are substantial producers in the oil industry.

Petroleum reserves in the Osage fall into the following four types:

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 425

1. Proven developed and partially developed pools that are operated as
primarily recovery pools;

2. Proven developed and partially developed pools that are operated as
secondary recovery projects, by gas injection in a few instances or by
water flood in the large majority of such projects;

3. Presently undeveloped by proven secondary recovery reserves; and

4. Undiscovered commercial deposits of oil and/or gas. 31

These reserves have been estimated to be 647 million barrels. This estimate
was based on the technology of the early-1960s and does not include the
factor of improved technology. In plain English, this means that the Osage
had enough oil to last beyond the year 2020.

Extensions
The First Extension

There have been four extensions of the Osage Mineral Trust plus one at¬
tempt to terminate both the trust and the tribe. The fourth extension was
into perpetuity. Fortunately, the council has been able to cope with all threats
to the mineral trust. However, these extensions to the mineral trust have not
been obtained without paying a price. The two most significant prices paid
have been the Gross Production Tax and paying all the expenses of operat¬
ing the Osage Agency.

The Allotment Act of 1906 fixed the term of the mineral trust at twenty-
five years. That is, both the mineral trust and the mineral estate were to end
in 1931. At that time, the mineral estate was to pass to the property owner.
Since it was obvious that only a small fraction of the oil could be removed
by 1931, there was a great deal of concern among the Osages in the late-
1920s. Beyond the loss of communal domain lay another very real problem.
Wording in the 1906 act does not define “property owner.” If it meant the
property owner of record in 1931, then the mineral rights would pass to
many white people. But if it meant the allottee who first held individual
ownership to the land, then the mineral rights would remain in the hands
of individual Osages. However, this would mean some allottees or their
heirs would have mineral rights and others would not.

The operators as well as the Osages were very concerned about this
problem. It is much easier and economical for an oil operator to lease from
one owner instead of several. Also, a contract to drill obtained from the
United States government is less subject to disputes and court litigation.
Thus, the operators had ample reason to support extending the Osage Min¬
eral Trust.

However, in and around Pawhuska, there were banks and Osage guardi-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

426 / Black Gold

ans who had acquired lands in Osage County. These persons formed what
they were pleased to call the Home Owners Association. This association
was doing everything possible to defeat the extension of the Osage Mineral
Trust. They were thinking that if they could defeat the extension they might
be able to acquire for a few dollars the mineral rights to the lands they had
obtained.

On January 22,1920, the Osage Tribal Council clearly demonstrated that
they could adapt Osage wiles to the white mans world. The resolution they
adopted is a masterpiece of Osage logic and a classic example of “bluff war.”

whereas, the most vital question that now confronts the Osage Tribe
is the question of the extension of the mineral period; and;
whereas, it has come to the knowledge of the Council that some of
the officers and directors of certain banks are using their efforts to
defeat legislation by Congress providing for the extension of the min¬
eral period; and

whereas, there are a number of persons acting as guardians of estates
of members of the Osage Tribe of Indians, who are also endeavoring
to defeat legislation by Congress to extend said mineral period; and
whereas, said banks have large deposits of Osage Tribal funds and said
guardians are receiving great benefits from handling the estates of
members of the tribe, and in opposing the extension of the mineral
period, are working to the detriment of the Osage Tribe of Indians
and to the detriment of their wards, respectively; and
whereas, the Osage Tribal Council feels that banks and persons who
are receiving benefits from the Osage Tribe of Indians and from mem¬
bers thereof, ought not in any way interfere with or bring any influ¬
ence to bear against the granting of said extension, and that if they
continue to do so, said banks ought not to be permitted to have de¬
posits of money belonging to the Osage Tribe, and such persons ought
not to be permitted to longer act as guardians of estates of members
of the Tribe;

therefore, be it Resolved by the Osage Tribal Council, duly in session
in the City of Washington on the 22nd day of Jan., 1920, and is so
resolved; That the Council hereby requests the Honorable Secretary of
the Interior and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to withdraw
from any bank, whose officers or directors use any influence to pre¬
vent the granting of an extension of the mineral period, all funds of
the Osage Tribe deposited therein, and that they use their influence
and efforts to cause to be removed any guardian of the estate of an

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 427

Osage Indian who is using his influence to prevent the granting of the

extension of the mineral period. 32

This resolution was sent to eighty-four guardians and seven banks. Acting
on the principal that “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush,” the
banks and guardians withdrew their opposition. The Osages had used “a
velvet glove over a mailed fist” and had won a victory. As in the past, when
the Osages fought a “bluff war” they usually had the power to back it up.
In this case, the BIA and Department of the Interior supported extending
the mineral trust.

The Osages had won a battle but not the war. On the brink of passage,
the entire proposal was brought to a standstill. Almost without warning, the
entire Oklahoma delegation to Congress refused to support the extension
bill. Without their endorsement, the bill would not have a chance to pass.
Demanding that the bill be amended to require a 5 percent Gross Produc¬
tion Tax, the Oklahoma delegation blocked the extension. Having no alter¬
native, the council agreed to the tax amendment to get the extension. After
passage, it was discovered that an additional 1 percent roads and bridges tax
had also been added to the amendment. This additional 1 percent tax had
never been discussed with the delegation and was added to the bill without
informing the Osages, who had agreed only to a 5 percent Gross Produc¬
tion Tax. The Osages filed a claim for this portion of the tax but the claims
courts ruled against them. 33 After thirty years of paying this one percent
to Osage County, the roads show very little relationship to the amount of
money paid.

Second and Third Extensions

The second extension was accomplished without any problems. On March
2, 1929, Congress extended the Osage Mineral Trust to January 22, 1958.
However, a clause to limit the extension was included, stating, “unless oth¬
erwise provided by Act of Congress.” No concession was made to secure
this second extension. Like the second extension, the third extension had no
opposition and required no special concession. The wording remained the
same, except the terminal date was changed to April 8, 1983.

Fourth Extension

To ease the recurring renewals, the council in 1963 proposed extending the
Mineral Trust in perpetuity. Congress apparently liked the idea and without
opposition enacted a fourth extension. The difference in this extension was
that it had no specific term, but extended in perpetuity. Yet it also allowed

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

428 / Black Gold

the council to dispose of the mineral estate with a two-third majority vote
of the headrights and approval of the Secretary of the Interior. Apparently,
this provision was to allow the council to devise a means of termination
that would insure the mineral benefits, if any remained, to devolve upon the
heirs of the allottees.

Threat of Termination
What Would Happen to the Minerals?

As mentioned earlier, the first renewal involved the question of who would
own the mineral rights if the trust was not extended and the communal
rights were abandoned. The best answer to that question is summed up in
two points.

1. Congress could not have given the minerals to the secondary surface
owners because the Osages bought the lands and the minerals, thus, the
Osages could not have been deprived of the minerals except by due
process of the law and due compensation.

2. By virtue of the Allotment Act of 1906, Sec. 1, Sec. 2, Sub-Sec. 7, and
Sec. 5, all mineral ownership, if the trust is discontinued, must revert
to the individual allotees or their heirs. 34

One could have argued that the 425,000 acres that had passed from Osage
hands by 1920 was sold at a lower price to compensate for the lack of min¬
eral rights to go with the land. Between June 30, 1915, and June of 1916,
13,123 acres had been sold at an average price of $6.31 per acre. In the fiscal
year ending in June of 1917, 10,346 acres were sold at $9.51 per acre. No
lands were sold in 1917-1918 but those sold in 1919 brought $18.44 P er acre.
From this, it is obvious that Osage lands were selling at a very low price. 35

Agency Costs

Some confusion exists as to who has paid for the agency expenses in the past
and who pays these costs today. Apparently, the Osages have paid for the
costs of administrating the mineral trust since 1906. Possibly, this would
include some nonmineral trust costs. In 1953, the Osages were facing ter¬
mination in the form of House Concurrent Resolution 108. The testimony
of the Osages in the hearings on this bill was heard July 22, 1953. The an¬
swer to who has been paying the costs of the agency and who is now paying
the costs was brought out in the testimony.

mr. Harrison. You are willing to pay every bit of the expenses?

MR. LAB AD IE [GEORGE V.] . YeS,sil\

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 429

mr. harrison. That will include not only the $40,000, which is the
difference between the $300,000 cost of operation and the $260,000
you pay, but also the cost of administration by the Department of the
Interior.

mr. labadie. Correct, and the area directors.

mr. harrison. I understand then you will take immediate steps to
work out with the Department of the Interior representatives the plans
to take care of the payment on a fair and equitable basis?
mr. labadie. Certainly.

mr. harrison. I might say I can find no fault with an agreement of
that kind nor can I find any fault with the continuation of the trust
provided you are willing to pay for the additional cost.

I must say just as frankly that I feel that a tribe that is as wealthy
as your tribe is and people as competent as you are, making the rec¬
ord that you and other people have in business, certainly should not
expect the federal government to continue payment of all the extra
costs. If the continuation of [the] trust is going to be beneficial to
you, then you should be willing to pay for it.
mr. labadie. That is correct. And we will do that. 36

The Klamath Tribe

In essence, this bill proposed specifically to terminate the Flathead Tribe of
Montana, the Klamath Tribe of Oregon, the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin,
the Osage Tribe of Oklahoma, the Potawatomi Tribe of Kansas and Ne¬
braska, and some Chippewa. The Klamath and Osage tribes were the only
two tribes who paid any part of their agency expenses. Since the passage of
this bill, the Osages are the only tribe paying their agency expenses and the
only tribe to pay all their agency costs.

Shrinking the Mineral Estate
Big Reservoirs

There were other troubles causing concern among the Osage people, aside
from the gross production tax and termination. Surely, the problem of
shrinking the mineral estate is of great concern. At first glimpse, a reservoir
here and another there does not seem to involve much area. However, when
one adds up the total areas that are removed from production, it translates
into a considerable sum of money. Of course, one could point out that com¬
pensation was made for the lost production. While this meets the require¬
ment of “due process of law,” it nevertheless reduces the mineral domain.
Experience has shown that these sums paid are far below the value of the
lost production, as later events clearly support. As John Donne wrote, “If a

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

430 / Black Gold

clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory
were, as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were. . . . ” 37
The truth is that although some almost token payment is made, thousands
of acres are effectively taken out of production because possible leakage
discourages lessees. Dams such as Hulah, Birch, Candy, Kaw, Skiatook, Sand
Creek, and Shidler have very large flood or maximum holding basins.
While some of these are still in the proposal stage, the last six will eventu¬
ally cover 39,500 acres. We would estimate that the Hulah reservoir would
be approximately 8,000 acres. If this is true, 47,500 acres of the mineral
estate would either be lost or for all practical purposes put out of produc¬
tion. Only an operator with an exceptional taste and purse for litigation
would attempt to produce oil in these basins.

Small Reservoirs

A lesser problem arises from municipal and private lakes. While our list of
thirty-nine lakes of ten acres or more does not include all such lakes in the
county, their total acreage is surprising. These thirty-nine lakes cover 2,881
acres. The Osages, through the Attorney General’s Office, sued the City of
Pawhuska to recover lost revenues due to Blue Stem Lake (Civil Action No.
4057). As a result, the Osages received some compensation and established
the legal precedent to collect from smaller reservoirs.

Parks and Preserves

A greater threat to reducing the mineral domain came in the cloak of a
park. In 1980, the National Park Service fired its opening guns by seeking
to acquire 97,000 acres for a tall grass preserve or park. Although this was
subsequently scaled down to 50,000 acres of owned land and 50,000 acres
of partial lease land, it did not pass through Congress. The problem is not
dead, but it lies dormant and could erupt again at anytime. In these days of
growing population in the urban areas, there is a corresponding demand for
recreation areas. Osage County is one of the few sizable areas that have not
been polluted by an excess of population. The future will bring increasing
pressure for more reservoirs and more parks in the Osage country. It is a
jewel that the urban dweller cannot resist.

THE MINERALS COUNCIL
Introduction

An interesting aspect of Osage government under the minerals council has
been noted: “Those who served on the council were faced with a perplex -
ingly diverse constituency. As they tried to balance their duties as a corpo-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 431

rate board of directors with a humanistic solicitude for the tribe s welfare,
the incompatibility of the two concerns seemed painfully irresolvable.” 38
There can be no doubt that the minerals council has functioned extremely
well as a corporate body. However, when one looks to the human aspects of
government, the council has bumbled, delayed, and plainly fell far short of
meeting the needs of the Osage people as a whole.

Largely, this is a legacy of that terrible conflict over establishing the roll.
The greed which spurred that conflict still affects those in power. While the
mineral estate is secure, other monies such as grants and claims would likely
have to be shared with more Osages if things were changed. However, more
than this inherited greed, the fear of creating more Osages from non-Osages
sits in the back of Osage minds when a radical change in government is
proposed.

It took the minerals government a full decade to realize there was a
growing number of unallotted Osages. It bothered some of the old full-
bloods that Osage children born after July, 1907, were not sharing in the
mineral domain. This was not the traditional Osage way of conducting their
affairs. From their view, all Osages shared and shared alike in common prop¬
erty. Chief Fred Lookout reflected another traditional characteristic on this
question: “some will be in favor, and a good many will be opposed . . . [we
should] unite and act as one and not argue this very serious question.” 39 The
proposal to include more Osages as full citizens of the tribe was dropped
because the council could not unite and act as one.

While the problem of the unallotted “outcasts” remained unsolved, the
council did come to grips with three other voting problems. These were: (1)
the vote for female allottees; (2) absentee voting; and (3) votes for unallotted
Osages who had inherited headrights or portions of headlights. All three of
these were implemented. 40 However, a fourth problem is rarely mentioned
and is not generally known among the Osage people.

Lost Votes

As it often happens, one heir, usually a white spouse, is left a life interest in
a headlight. At the same time, another heir or heirs are left title to the head-
right. In such situations the headlight cannot be voted. That is, until the
person with the life interest dies, and all monies legally go to the headlight
owners, no one can vote for that headlight. So, a sizable number of head-
rights cannot be voted. In a “good” election, around 800 votes are cast.
Some of these absent votes are owned by white persons or institutions. A
few are probably nonvoters but out of the total votes possible, probably three
hundred or more nonvotes are life interest headrights.

While considering the third extension of the Mineral Trust in 1957,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

432 / Black Gold

Congress had written the Bill with a requirement of district representation
nationwide (United States), better procedures for absentee ballots, and a
vote for all adult Osages. However, all these provisions were deleted from the
bill before it was enacted. 41

Unallotted “Outcasts”

Logan vs. Andrus

The problem of the unallotted “outcasts” kept festering. A group calling
themselves the Osage National Organization (ONO) was formed and sought
to change the governmental organization. Therefore, some investigation was
made by a federal commission. Possibly the greatest impact was made as the
result of the case of Logan, et al. u Andrus, et al. In a decision dated October
5, 1978, three points were brought out, but the first point is of special inter¬
est: “Secretary of the Interior was attempting to exercise legislative power
when he purportedly abolished government of Osage Nation in 1900, and
thus such action was beyond scope of his authority and of no legal effect.” 42

Naturally, this decision was a bombshell in the BIA and Osage Agency.
In a memorandum, Scott Keep, Assistant Solicitor for Tribal Government
and Alaska, discusses the implications of the Logan case. 43 Among other mat¬
ters the confused status of Osage citizenship as a result of the decision was
discussed. Although the field solicitor cites references to unallotted Osages
and minor members of the tribe in 1938 as making descendants of the al¬
lottees members of the tribe, the assistant solicitor expressed doubts about
this “evidence:” “I am not confident, however, that either of these acts [cites
acts mentioned above] resolves my dilemma which is to determine who are
the members of the governmental entity, known as the Osage Tribe, as op¬
posed to who are those Osage Indians or persons of Osage Indian descent
who are entitled to share in certain property interests. Membership in an
Indian tribe is a bilateral, governmental relationship as I have already men¬
tioned. It is a relationship that clearly contemplates something more than
mere descendency.” 44

Questionable Citizenship

If this problem of Osage citizenship was not enough to shake the adminis¬
tration on Ki he ka Hill (location of the agency offices), another state¬
ment by the Assistant Solicitor must have at least caused a slight quiver.
“The membership situation is further confused by the courts recognition
of the 1881 constitution as the law of the Osage Tribe.” This latter point
was to some degree put into limbo by the Appellate Court. Yet, the ques¬
tion of Osage citizenship still remains today. Subsequent court cases never
touched on this point. After a long series of suits the status of citizenship

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 433

and voting in a representative tribal government is absent for over 10,000
Osages.

While the trial court brought the matters above into the case, it ruled
against the plaintiffs on the matter of suit. That is, it sought a judgment
declaring that the Osage Tribal Council was limited in its powers to admin¬
istration of the Osage mineral estate and did not have authority to partici¬
pate in or represent the Osage tribe in the various federal programs made
available to entities such as the tribe. Thus, the court ruled that the minerals
council also had general governmental powers. So, the plaintiffs appealed.

The appellate court not only affirmed the lower courts decision, but it
refused to consider either the citizenship question or the question of the
1881 Constitution. Its grounds for this refusal were that the plaintiffs all had
headrights and the right to vote. As such, they were not entitled to seek
relief from a condition which they were not a party. Thus, the question of
the 1881 Constitution was placed in limbo; its validity as the Osage gov¬
ernment had not been determined. The citizenship question remains, but it
would possibly include descendants of the allottees as citizens.

FORTUNES AND MISFORTUNES
Income
Boom

By 1906, the trust and diminished reserve lands in Kansas had been sold, and
the funds derived from their sale were drawing 5 percent interest. Grass
lease money was also adding to the Osage income, but it was no longer paid
after 1907. As was pointed out in an earlier chapter, the Osages were con¬
sidered to be well off by 1890, and by 1900 they were described as the
wealthiest people in the world.

However, the 1920s ushered in an era of high income for the Osages that
far exceeded the above-average prosperity in the majority culture. Appar¬
ently, the income from oil and gas peaked in 1925 at $29,584,739. But from
1925 to 1931, oil and gas income shows a sharp decline. 45 This was largely
due to the economic crash of 1929. A slight recession in 1925 did not stall
the overall economy, but the agricultural sector of the economy did not
recover from the 1925 recession until the Great Depression ended. This re¬
cession of 1925 partially reduced the demand for oil and gas and so reduced
Osage income.

Bust

The unstable economy after 1925 made exploring for new pools of oil in
the Osage a riskier business than normal. Hence, wildcatters could not get

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

434 / Black Gold

financing to drill exploratory wells. The lack of new production also cut
into Osage income. A final factor in declining oil and gas income was an
increasing number of aging wells. By 1930, over one-half of the wells in the
Osage had become “stripper” wells. That is, they produced less than ten bar¬
rels a day. They were marginal wells that required favorable market condi¬
tions to operate at a profit.

As the economy staggered in 1925 and then collapsed in 1929, these mar¬
ginal wells were the first to shut down. An oil well is not like a water tap
in homes. One cannot turn a well on and off like a water tap. An idle well
begins to seal off the pores in the oil-bearing layer around the well’s collec¬
tion basin. The lighter elements that keep the petroleum fluid evaporate,
leaving an excess of paraffin and greases that act as barriers to any future
flow.

Reactivating such wells is expensive and the return on the investment
can often be a disappointment. In limestone layers, hydrochloric acid (com¬
mercial forms are called muriatic acid) can be pumped into the hole. Enough
limestone is eaten away to allow the oil to flow again if all goes as planned.
This will not work in layers that do not contain lime. Another technique
called “fracking” is used in such layers. In fracturing, sand is forced between
the rock layers around the wells collecting basin by hydraulic pressure. Thus,
new channels of flow are opened. Only the demands of World War II could
justify the expense of reactivating such wells, but usually these inactive
wells had been “pulled” and “capped” by that time.

Credit

One of the more troublesome income problems was the use of credit. This
was a lingering legacy of the fur trade. In a barter system such as was used
in the fur trade, credit was necessary. However, in a monetary system, it was
an expensive practice when used to supply daily needs. Yet, extensive use of
credit in lieu of money was still utilized by the Osages long after the fur
trade ended. Although the Great Depression all but ended the practice, it is
still used today.

As in the fur trade, credit was customarily used to pad the accounts of
Osages. This was a widespread practice by merchants, auto dealers, and those
rendering professional services. Because of easily obtained credit, Osages
often tended to overspend. As a result, they rarely had ready cash and did not
develop a “feel” for the value of money.

In 1901, traders on the Osage reservation were still required to be li¬
censed to trade. Credit to 60 percent of the last quarterly payment was
placed as a maximum that the BIA would recognize for any individual
Osage debt. Yet, this plan was flawed, for provisions to withhold as many

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 435

quarterly payments as necessary to pay off an individuals debt were also
provided. 4,1

As part of the picture of credit available to the Osage, some idea of shop¬
ping areas and availability of goods should be given. “There are now 9
trading points on the reservation and 140 licenses are in force, representing
nearly every line of business. There are also 4 banks. . . . There are 23 gen¬
eral stores, 4 lumber yards, 4 meat markets, 2 drug stores, 1 flour mill, 2
newspapers, 5 blacksmith shops, 6 hotels, 5 bakeries, 5 dressmaking and mil¬
linery establishments, 7 livery stables, 6 contractors; and a large number of
other occupations are represented by from one to five persons or firms.” 47
A system of trading cards had been devised to more easily keep track of
individual debt. Amounts of each transaction were entered on the card, and,
thus, the total indebtedness could be easily obtained at the time of purchase.
When the individual card holder reached sixty percent of payment, he was
to receive no more credit.

In 1901, the total claims for trading debts amounted to $429,396.32. At
the end of June, 1903, the debt had been reduced to $142,265.98. By the end
of June, 1904, the total debt was paid off. Each individual incurring the debt
paid his or her share by repaying the tribal funds from their annuity pay-

ments.

Shenanigans

Fun

During the Great Depression we often heard Osage allottees say ruefully,
“If the money ever starts coming in again, I will be a little wiser in how I
use it.” This would usually be followed by a grin and a twinkle of the eye.
Sometimes, the allottee would add, “Boy! We sure had a hellva’ time while
it lasted.” After World War II, when the payments again became fairly large,
very few Osages “blew their bundle.” They were less trusting of their mer¬
chants, bankers, and other “friends.” When they felt something was worth¬
while, the checkbook was used but their spending was on the conserva¬
tive side.

Stories of the wild Osage fantasies are endless. Here were a fun loving
people of limited means who had acquired the economic means to fulfill
their sense of humor and fantasies. A few of these stories will give a cross-
sectional insight into Osage character and life in the 1920s.

The Tuxedo

One Osage man had to make a trip to Washington, D.C. He got on the train
at Pawhuska wearing his blanket and moccasins. When he got back to the
Pawhuska depot, he was all dressed up in a tuxedo and patent leather shoes.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

436 / Black Gold

He explained that when he got to St. Louis he thought he should get
some citizen clothes. So he bought the shoes and tuxedo, including a lot of
high collars. He claimed the collars were so high that all he could see was
the sky. Anyway, he looked prosperous, so everybody in Washington re¬
spected him for his clothes and especially his collars.

Later, it was discovered that he had worn his blanket and moccasins all
the time he was away. On his way home he had bought the tux and collars
to make a joke. Osage humor always cuts at dignity. 49 The white men who
wore their silly high collars were extremely funny to the Osages. To them,
it seemed ridiculous that anyone who wore high collars and, thus, had their
nose in the air continually could amount to anything because all they could
see was the sky.

The Graduate

An Indian boy, a graduate of an Eastern university, came home from
school with his diploma. His proud old father made him a present of
a dozen of the gayest and most expensive blankets he could find and
added several pairs of exquisitely beaded moccasins. On top of this he
gave his son a huge new car. To the honor of the boy—and the honor
of his university, too—the young man put aside his store clothes and
his nifty college shoes, and whenever he rode in that car he wore a
blanket and moccasins.

“It’s my university outfit from dad,” he used to explain. 50

This story shows two other facets of Osage character—generosity and re¬
spect for one’s elders.

The Bear

We would not want to embarrass anyone, so real names are not used in this
story. Old Bill was a drinker; when he got his payment he vanished. The
young men would make up a betting pool on how Bill would reappear.
Everyone missed the bet when Bill came back less than sober, driving a
motorcycle with a sidecar. A glance at his passenger made us all speechless.
Sitting up in the sidecar was a bear cub.

Bill lost the motorcycle to pay off debts, but he kept the cub. The two
often boxed and wrestled when Bill was sober. However, the day came when
the bear reached a good size. Bill and the bear were boxing around one day
when the bear gave Bill a swat that caused Bill to trade ends. That was the
last of the bear—he vanished and he never came back. There is no particular
point to the story. It was merely an episode in Osage life during the 1920s.
We worked with Bill for two months in the Indian Division of the CCC

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 437

(CCC-ID). At that time, we were digging wings and footings for wall
dams. This required that one be down in a gully where no breeze could help
cool the body. Although we were in our late teens, the heat was still almost
unbearable. Bill’s whisky-soft body must have shrieked in protest. Yet, he
never complained and swung his mattock and wielded his shovel on the dry
clay with the best of us young men. Bill swore that when his payment came
he would not go away on a drunk—but he did.

Divorce

A cousin loves to relate his experience with his first wife, who was a white
woman. In the divorce settlement, he was left with virtually nothing. This
was common in the 1920s when young Osages were enticed into marriage
with white spouses who were after Osage money.

One would expect the young man to be bitter about the divorce, and
probably he was. But like the good Osage he is, he made a joke of the bitter
experience. His description of the divorce decree is graphic, “Hell, I thought
the judge said alimony, I didn't know he said all the money.”

Fleecing the Osages
The Guardians

“Bad! Man, they’re crazy! Money-crazy! They started about five years ago
cheatin' rich Indians, and now they’ve got to cheatin' themselves and no one
knows where it’ll end. They certainly need a revival up Pawhuska way.” 51
Possibly, the description above is an exaggeration. Many non-Osages would
choose to believe it is an inflated version of the situation, but Osages would
tend to think it was a conservative description. There is enough evidence
available to strongly support the Osage view.

The cheating by merchants was a terrible practice, but it was petty theft
when compared to the guardianship larceny. According to G. Edward Tinker,
“The blackest chapter in the history of the State will be the Indian guardi¬
anship over these estates. . . . Men made a profession of it. Sometimes as
many as 15 guardianships have been under 1 man. . . . Why should any In¬
dian, any Osage Indian . . . have a guardian? This Department is there for
the purpose of taking care of them, though I understand they are trying to
shirk their duty by getting them under guardianship; but, nevertheless, it is
their duty to take care of them; and not the courts of the county.” 52

Tinker was challenged on his testimony by a Pawhuska attorney who
argued that any wrongs detected in the guardianship system were quickly
corrected by the courts. Ten years later (1953) an investigation by the BIA
fully supported Tinker’s rather temperate testimony.

We would like to cite three of the guardianship findings reported in the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

438 / Black Gold

investigation. “At the time of the 1929 hearing, this Indian was in debt ap¬
proximately $20,000 for mortgages held by his attorney despite the fact that
he had, within the year, inherited an estate of more than $90,000 and had
been drawing substantial quarterly payments averaging $7,000 to $12,000
annually since 1924. He was unable to account for $55,000 of his in¬
come.” 53 Apparently, the attorney-guardian had taken an income that aver¬
aged $30,000 a year for five years and converted it into a $20,000 debt and
$55,000 profit for himself. Since the debt was to the attorney also, this
guardianship yielded the attorney at least $75,000 profit over and above his
legal guardianship fees for five years. The truly terrifying aspect of this is
that the county courts supported this attorney and, thus, legalized the cor¬
ruption. “Not publicised, but matters of record, are numerous other cases of
exploitation the Osages have experienced. One such case is that of an attor¬
ney who, on September 20, 1923, was found guilty in the Court of Osage
County of defrauding his ward, an incompetent Osage Indian, in an auto¬
mobile transaction. The guardian had purchased an automobile for $250
from another guardian, who had purchased it new for $1,145, and then ar¬
ranged for its sale to his ward for $i,250.” 54 This conviction of a mere
$1,000 fraud (grand larceny) was indeed rare. The evidence and circum¬
stance must have been overwhelming to render the court unable to avoid a
conviction. Atonement for the conviction was apparently made by the court,
however, since the attorney was subsequently made guardian over several
other Osages.

The attitude of the guardian in another case is enlightening. The
transcript in this case shows that Mr. ***, a 37-year old Osage of!!/16
blood, had received between July 1, 1916, and September 30, 1925, a
sum of $100,200 and owed $14,000. His only property was valued at
$19,630, and the testimony developed the fact that the ward had bought
property from his guardian prior to the guardianship arrangement and
at the time of the hearing was paying $1,200 a year on it and interest
at 10 per cent.

The guardian strenuously protested revocation of his ward s certifi¬
cate of competency, arguing that his ward “is entirely competent so
long as I have charge of his affairs.” 53

We do not wish to dwell only upon the guardianship crooks. The courts
were responsible for most of these problems.

The Courts

Probate courts opened the door for much of the crimes against Osages. The
council finally enacted a formal resolution against the courts. This, of course,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 439

touches on other forms of exploitation. “[Ejxperience had conclusively
proved that welfare of those members of our Tribe who do not have cer¬
tificates of competency cannot be entrusted to certain courts of the State
of Oklahoma, as shown by the following incidents which are matters of
public record:” 56 We will include only one of the many incidents in the
report. “The County Judge frankly admits he approved these claims know¬
ing they were barred by the statute of limitations. This matter was discussed
. . . with the administrator as to why he approved these claims, knowing . . .
they [were] not lawful charges against the decedents estate. The administra¬
tor admitted it was a mistake . . . but said to get the creditors off his shoul¬
ders he approved the claims, relying on the Department to deny payment
from estate funds.” 57 One would think that these attitudes, practices, and
crimes committed by the cheating merchants would have been the end of
gouging the Osages, but this would be far from true. The county govern¬
ment had to get into the looting game too. One of its practices involved
overcharging on recording fees.

However, the attitude that honest people could honorably cheat the
Osages prevailed throughout the county. This permeated the business and
professional community as well as the government and law enforcement.
Unarmed Osages were shot down for minor offenses or jailed for no reason
other than that they were Osages.

One of the worst such incidents was the killing of Roy Tinker, which
occurred on April 6, 1919. Being a Sunday, it was quiet in Pawhuska. The
quiet was disturbed by Roy Tinker, who was drunk. He had been stopped
for a traffic violation and after signing the citation started to walk home.
Hiram Stevens, the new chief of police, came up as Roy started to walk
across the street. Hiram called out for Roy to stop. Roy either did not hear
the command or decided to ignore it. Stephens then shot Roy twice in the
back. Stephens started to the police station with him, but seeing he was
dying loaded him in a taxi. Taking him to the Johnson funeral parlor,
Stephens dumped the dying youth partly in the doorway and left. Of course,
Stephens was tried for the cold-blooded murder, but he was not convicted
because all he had killed was an Osage. 58 This was not an unusual occur¬
rence. While police officers did not usually run around killing Osages, it
was fairly common among private citizens.

Reign of Terror
Introduction

Probably no other aspect of Osage history has received as much attention
as the series of Osage murders in the 1920s. An excellent account of a spe¬
cial facet of these murders was written by Bill Burchardt: “It is a mistake to
view these crimes in a different light because the criminals were white, and

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

440 / Black Gold

the victims Indian. This was no race war. Criminals did not prey on the
Osages because they were Indians, but because they had money. Vultures
quickly descended on every western boomtown from California to Kansas,
from Montana to Texas. The murderers, cardsharps, dope doctors, thieves,
and shyster lawyers in the Osage would have schemed just as malevolently
had their wealthy victims been white, and they would have succeeded
equally as well.” 59 This point was probably correct where the motive was
purely to secure money. But some Osage murders did involve bias and atti¬
tudes toward the Osages and Indians.

It was murder because of greed for money and possessions that aroused
the great American public. There was a vast difference in the violence and
corruption in the Osage and that found in boom areas in the past. Burchardt
notes that “The difference was that the Osage was viewed in the limelight
of mass communications. Other western boom violence had been viewed
in retrospect. . . . but the blood and thunder in the Osage was happening
now. The nation was astonished, shocked, and secretly delighted, to find a last
outpost of the Old West still alive, ‘raising hell and putting a chunk under
it.’ It made for avid reading. . . . and brought forth howls of condemnation
from the righteous.” 60

Most Americans thought the Old West was gone along with the nine¬
teenth century. Yet, it was somewhat of a thrill to discover that it still ex¬
isted in the Osage. However, few frontier historians would concede that the
western frontier continued into the twentieth century. All over the West
there were frontier pockets which were mostly boom areas. Nevertheless,
the Osage Old West was unusual in another way. It was structured around
Indians who stood at O Ke sa or midway. The Osages were truly the “Mid¬
dle People” (Ni U Kon scah) for they stood midway between the past and
the present. Standing in two cultures as they did, they were the Travelers in
the Mists 61 of the new Indian of the twentieth century.

The Murders

The bodies of Charles Whitehorn and Anna Brown were found near the
end of May in 1921. Whitehorn’s body was found in the timber upon Dial
Hill on the north side of Pawhuska. Anna’s body was found in a pasture near
Gray Horse. Although both had been shot to death and they were both
Osage, this appeared to be the only connection between the two murders.
The Sheriff made an effort to locate the murderers, but he never found the
criminals. The case lay dormant in the local law enforcement files with
other unsolved incidents involving Osage deaths.

On a cold Tuesday afternoon of early February, 1923, the frozen body of
Henry Roan Horse was found. His body was sitting in his car slumped over

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 441

the steering wheel. Henry had been shot in the head with a forty-five. The
car was parked off the old Burbank road about six miles north of Fairfax.

While the murder of Henry Roan Horse was still being discussed, an
event at Fairfax shook the city in a very literal sense. A terrific explosion
early in the morning of March 13, 1923, completely demolished the Bill
Smith home. Three people died because of the explosion. Mr. and Mrs.
Smith and their maid were all killed. Mr. Smith and the maid were white
persons. Mrs. Reta Smith was daughter to Lizzie Que and a sister of Anna
Brown, who had been found shot to death over a year earlier. The Osage
council appealed to the federal government for assistance since the local
officers seemed to be unable to solve Osage murder cases.

The newly created Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was sent to
investigate these murders. These were the first murder cases the FBI ever
worked on. It should be noted that these murder cases almost immediately
began to open up. Widespread coverage of the murders had placed all gov¬
ernmental units under very heavy pressure to find the guilty persons and to
prosecute them.

Some connections among the various murders and mysterious deaths be¬
gan to emerge. Lizzie Que emerged as the center around which the murders
revolved. Two months after Anna Browns body was found, her mother Liz¬
zie Que died from drinking bad whisky, probably deliberately poisoned.
Mollie Kyle was sister to Anna Brown and Reta Smith. Lizzie, their mother,
had three full headrights, and each of the daughters each had their own full
headright plus a fractional headright inherited from a deceased relative. Now
that all these headrights would come to Mollie, she became a suspect.

Mollie did not remain a suspect very long because her husband, Ernest
Burkhart, emerged as a prime suspect. William K. Hale, a wealthy rancher
in the Osage, was uncle to Ernest Burkhart. Hale came to the Osage from
Texas. After he became established in the Osage, he encouraged other mem¬
bers of his family to join him. In this way, Burkhart came to the Osage and
married Mollie Kyle. Thus, Hale became a suspect through his connection
with his nephew.

The Trials

Hale’s money and influence drug the case through three trials in almost four
years. Not all these were county and state trials. The federal courts were the
ones which ultimately achieved convictions. Osage County officers and
courts could be affected by wealthy, influential white men, especially where
Osages were involved. Thus, much of the difficulty was brought on by ju¬
risdictional disputes between local and federal agencies. The first grand jury
indictments were mysteriously quashed. This was only one of the many pro-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

442 / Black Gold

cedural delays in the proceedings. The federal grand jury led to indictment
of fifteen persons involved in the murders. Although Hale, Burkhart, and
several others received life sentences, over a dozen murders connected with
the case remained unsolved.

The Osage tribe financed about one-third of the costs of bringing the
guilty to trial and prosecuting them. “Osage murder trials, Oklahoma: For
expenses in connection with the prosecution of the person or persons im¬
plicated in the crimes resulting in the murder of Osage citizens, for witness
fees and expenses, records, additional investigations, and all other purposes,
$10,000, or so much as may be necessary, to be paid from funds on deposit
in the United States Treasury to the credit of the Osage Tribe, and to remain
available until June 30, 1929: Provided, that no part of this sum shall be ex¬
pended for the compensation of attorneys.” 62 Despite the last proviso, the
Osages hired T. J. Leahy to represent them at the trial. They contributed
$20,000 to defray the costs exclusive of attorney fees. 63

Curse of Wealth

In 1884, Laban J. Miles wrote: “During the month of June I personally
visited almost every Osage camp while taking the census, ... I was often
made to exclaim, as I went from lodge to lodge and saw many with scrofu¬
lous sores, undressed, naked, and dirty-faced children, women broken down
with carrying heavy burdens, homes without any evidence of comfort or
refinement, ‘Rich, yet how poor!’ and wondered if even the hoarded mil¬
lions that these people possess in common would ever be appreciated by
them, or they use it to really better their condition.” 64 Miles was writing of
another time in Osage life when they were rich but lived poor. Possibly
they were happier in these times of living poor because they understood
poverty. Economic condition is a state of mind; happiness is a condition of
the soul.

As the money increased, Osage souls shrunk for want of happiness. They
found no happiness in possessing money; they enjoyed the passing pleasure
of buying new “things.” However, the “things” brought no lasting happi¬
ness because they had no meaning. Thus, Osage life had lost its purpose, and
their souls suffered for direction. It was a case of being set adrift in a strange
world. There was nothing familiar to clutch and stay afloat in the world of
white man’s wealth. Yet, one by one the Osages rediscovered old friends and
gradually made new friends in the strange, new white man’s culture. They
clung to their old ways, although they were forced to adapt them to the new
world. With more than a little fear cloaked in a haughty exterior, they
reached for the new world and often got burnt or crushed. However, they
persevered, they learned, and they adjusted until the strange sea became

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Black Gold / 443

their sea. Through all these terrible experiences, they were unhappy. Yet, the
task was made easier because of the money, although the money was also
making things more difficult.

This is to say the Osages followed a different road to accommodation
than other Indians. The problems of other Indians were largely caused by
a shortage of money. The Osage problems were primarily caused by too
much money.

It is this mixed blessing of money that is so often reflected in Osage
remarks. John Goodskins comment is well worth quoting: “I have a diploma
from Lawrence and they put a guardian over me. I fought in France for this
country, and yet I am not allowed even to sign my own checks. I don't
know what chicanery he [the guardian] used to get control of me, but here
I am, his ward.” 65 Money made his education possible, but, nonetheless, it
also attracted vultures to prey upon him and to prevent him from using his
education.

Sophie Captain Chouteau was a very wise person. She is one of the few
women to become an Osage chief. A reporter for Harper’s Magazine inter¬
viewed her at the Pawhuska Indian Camp.

“But your Osage tribe was very poor once,” you say to Aunt Sophie.

“Yes, yes!” she exclaims. “But we were better off then. My heart is
crying for our young people, for our girls. Too much money is very
bad.” And then she adds, “It hurts the old folks, too, even the wise;
men.” 66

There was this longing to go back to the old life they loved so well. Yet,
there was an understanding that it was the young Osages who were carry¬
ing the real burden of the transition. Possibly, it was this knowledge that
caused them to relax the stern discipline of excellence traditionally instilled
into young Osages. Some think it was caused by spoiling the young with
lavish gifts, but this cannot be true because the Osages had always done this.
No, it was a lack of the firm hand of direction that cast the young Osage
adrift in a strange sea.

As the Harper’s reporter commented in another place, not all the problems
came from within the Osages. The terrible spell cast upon the Osage reser¬
vation still lingers in milder forms today, as was also noted by the Harper’s
writer:

There are 265,000 Indians in the United States; their race is not
dying out. But, of them all, it is not improbable that these Osage In-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

444 / Black Gold

dians, with their wealth, are the unhappiest. You have that impression
as you leave Pawhuska; it is not a happy town.

A blight of gold and oil and greed is on it, as heavy a curse as
Indians have ever had from their wickedest medicine men. 67

One day our grandfather stopped us as we were trying to kill a dragonfly
with a clod. Horrified at what we were trying to do, he explained that this
was one of the guardians.

There were at least seven guardians who looked after the honor of an
Osage. For those who dishonored their people, strange penalties were as¬
signed. Some laugh at these old Osage beliefs, but they are not mere super¬
stition. Modern psychologists are finding that the state of the mind affects
more than we once thought. The Old Osages, in their wisdom, knew this
long ago. It was this condition or state of the mind that was called the pun¬
ishment of the guardians.

The question here is, was it the guardians that placed the curse of wealth
upon the people? Did they lift the penalty of unhappiness when the Osages
again became an honorable people? Part of the penalty assigned by the
guardians is that we will never know.

This we do know—the Osages passed another bend in the river of life.
The people survived and became stronger because of the ordeal. Yet, some
of the anguish lingers. Possibly, when it has all been said and time has healed
the hurt, the following words of John Goodskin will no longer bring to the
mind such terrible pictures: “In the old days, before we had money, it was
easy enough. All you had to do was not get drunk. But, now your good
behavior has nothing at all to do with it. Your money draws ’em and you’re
absolutely helpless. They have all the law and all the machinery on their side.
Tell everybody, when you write your story, that they’re scalping our souls
out here.” 68

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences

and the Modern Indian

THE MISSING HISTORY
Introduction
Perception and Reality

In 1887, James Bryce described the influence of the American Indian as he
saw it. Bryce, reflecting what was then a popular opinion of the American
people, wrote that they have: “done no more than give a touch of romance
or a spice of danger to the exploration of some regions. . . while over the
rest of the country the unhappy aborigines have slunk silently away, scarcely
even complaining of the robbery of lands and the violation of plighted
faith.” 1 This is all too often the perception of the Indian in American his¬
tory even today.

Arrell Morgan Gibson is better tuned to the beat of the true pulse of
American history. He points out that the American public has been satu¬
rated with a stereotyped Indian that bears little relationship to reality. He
concludes by saying that “with an intellectually inert public, it is less what
a thing or person is, and more the perception panderers of popular culture
are able to plant in their constituency.” 2

We see little fault in believing that people, land, and cultures are the main
ingredients of the frontier. However, these are broad terms and when we
start defining the terms in detail we may be faulty in our concept. It seems
that land would also include resources both animate and inanimate. People
would include Euro-Americans, Indian Americans, African Americans, and
to some extent Asian Americans. Primarily, cultures would include Western
civilization and Indian civilization.

Walter Prescott Webb set forth a “boom hypothesis,” which seems to
have a great deal of merit: “The major premise is that the sudden acquisition
of land and other forms of wealth by the people of Europe precipitated a

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

446 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

boom on Western civilization, and that the boom lasted as long as the fron¬
tier was open, a period of four centuries. A corollary of the major premise
is that our modern institutions, as distinguished from medieval, were differ¬
entiated and matured during a boom, and are therefore, adapted to boom
conditions.” 3 We must point out that Webb completely omitted mention of
the Indian. Possibly, this was because he was advancing an economic instead
of a political or social hypothesis. Yet Indians did, in fact, affect the economic
institutions formed between 1500 and 1900. We will deal with these con¬
tributions later.

Part of the difficulty with including Indians in general histories is the
diversity or fragmentation of the Indian people—that is, the difficulty of
generalizing Indian history. It was this diversity that enabled Euro-Ameri¬
cans to so easily part the Indian from the land. When we use the term “In¬
dian,” we are speaking of about 200 different groups or nations. While these
nations undoubtedly shared many customs, practices, and characteristics in
common, they differed as often as they agreed. William Brandon, among
others, has addressed this problem: “A principal difficulty in treating Indian
history in depth is its fragmentation. The task of examining each tribal
group and each time-phase of each group and of conducting this investiga¬
tion partly in such other languages as anthropology is forbidding. The In¬
dian reality was of an astonishing diversity, a diversity that presents a con¬
stant problem in any wide-angle view of the American Indian.” 4

Indian Influence

Governor William Bradford of Plymouth Colony wrote in 1621: “And sure
it was God’s good providence that we found this come, for else we know
not how we should have done.” 5 What a shame that from the very first,
Euro-Americans chose to ignore the role of the Indian in their colonial
ventures. Bradford and the Pilgrims did not “find” the corn—Indians gave
the corn to them. Possibly God moved the Indians to do this. However, if
this is true, he also made Indians generous in other situations.

Bernard De Voto, who is often quoted in Indian histories, says, “A dis¬
maying amount of our history has been written without regard to Indians,
and of what is written with regard to them much treats their diverse and
always changing societies as uniform and static. . . . Most American history
has been written as if history were a function of white culture in spite of
the fact that well into the nineteenth century the Indians were one of the
principal determinants of historical events. . . . American historians have
made shockingly little effort to understand how all these affected white
men and their societies.” 6

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 447

While the statements of authorities do not make anything true or false,
respect requires recognition of their remarks. In dealing with this problem,
one often encounters extreme statements that obviously have very little ba¬
sis in fact. Possibly this is done in an effort to free one’s mind from Bacon’s
Idols of the Mind. 7 Surely, this is admitted in some cases. 8

Followers of Fredric Jackson Turner tend to present the frontier as a new,
uninhabited area. The basic concept of the Turner thesis is that the frontier
blended the various European groups and made of them a new type of man
—an American. The thesis has a flaw in the premise that the frontier was
new and uninhabited. It had been occupied by Indians for thousands of
years and it was still occupied by them as the frontier advanced.

This image of a savage, new, virtually uninhabited frontier is a fallacy
with only a spot or two of truth. Turner also neglects to account for four
hundred years of intermarriage between Indians and Euro-Americans. Chil¬
dren of these marriages are the only new people created by the frontier. 9 If
Turner was arguing that the blending of Euro-Americans on the frontier
made a new man, he was mistaken. It was the blending of two cultures
totally alien to each other that generated a spirit of being American instead
of being European.

Our early historians, such as Francis Parkman, generated many Indian
fallacies. Two of these were that Indians won battles and lost wars because
they neglected to follow up on their victories. A second fallacy was that
Indians could not maintain a prolonged siege. Both fallacies were based on
the fact that Indians did not have supply trains and reserve forces.

A review of the conquest of the Southern Central Plains by the Osages
would show a consistent follow-up of battles won. During a fifty-year pe¬
riod the Osages conquered an area about the same size as that conquered by
Bonaparte in roughly the same amount of time. As for siege, the Osage
blockade of the Missouri and Arkansas Rivers denied Europeans any sig¬
nificant access to the heart of North America for one hundred fifty years.
However, if one thinks in terms of more conventional sieges, we find the
Indian against Indian siege at Detroit in 1714. Also, there is the Pontiac siege
of Ft. Pitt and Red Cloud’s blockade of the Powder River road. 1 "

Stress is always placed on how savage Indians were on the frontier. Rarely
is any mention made of the fact that the “brave pioneers” were invading the
“savage” Indian’s territory and stealing their food, the wild game. The in¬
consistency of the stereotyped “savage Indian” is a falsification, as can be
seen in the following quote. “Between 1783 and 1840 the Americans cor¬
rupted and dispossessed a new set of tribes between the Appalachians and
the plains country. As they became more dependent upon him [the trader]

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

448 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

for a wide range of commodities—guns and ammunition, kettles, blankets,
hoes, knives, and mirrors, to name only a few—their native crafts were for¬
gotten.” 11

These two frontiers, from the Atlantic to the Appalachians and from the
Appalachians to the eastern fringes of the Plains, dominated the American
thought during their existence. Connecting these two frontiers by rails cer¬
tainly affected the ties between the Northeast and the West. 12

Possibly the greatest fallacy is one of omission. That is, by omitting sig¬
nificant mention of the Indian role in American history one creates the
impression that only the Euro-Americans were significant. Aside from the
ethnic bias in presenting “evidence,” there is the more important misrepre¬
sentation of historic fact. This prevents detection of important facts such as
two frontier lines coexisting at the same time. The line of contact between
Indians and Euro-Americans set up a shock wave. Like ripples from a stone
thrown into a pool of water, the shock of the meeting of cultures radiated
to the west. Thus, an Indian to Indian frontier was created from the effects
of the Indian to Euro-American frontier. 13 The parallel to this concept
would be that there must have been “ripples” of Indian concepts radiating
from the Euro-American side of the frontier line, just as there were “ripples”
of Euro-American concepts on the Indian side of the line.

There has been a persistent effort to make some connection between
prehistoric Indian civilization and the Old World. Apparently, this effort is
partly motivated by a fear that establishing independent development and
maturity of the Indian civilization will undermine some “pet” theories.
Surely, a basic foundation of capitalism would be destroyed, namely, the be¬
lief that motivation by the desire for material gain is a universal of human
nature. More simply, this is expressed as the profit motive.

Thus, the question of independent development becomes a basic question
in economics, since Indians did not meet this “universal” concept. However,
the fact of independent development touches all areas of human learning.
The old idea of the various developmental stages of mankind from savagery
to barbarism and then to civilization does not hold water anymore. The
Indian civilization was as mature as Western civilization, but it was mature
in a different way. William Brandon points out, “It is not easy to feel that
Shakespeare was more primitive than Edgar A. Guest because he did not
have a typewriter . . . ” 14 Likewise, the Osages were no less culturally ma¬
ture than the English because they did not possess English hardware.

When people presume to argue for a place in history on behalf of any
ethnic group, it behooves them to justify their contention. With this in
mind, I would like to give an overview of contributions made by American
Indians. Others have made justification statements, among them, Alvin M.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 449

Josephy: “All aspects of Indian existence—agriculture, government, religion,
trade, mythology, and arts and crafts—influenced white men at one time or
another and helped to shape the destiny of each of the countries of the
Western Hemisphere.” 15

Any time two strangers meet, the stage is set for a mutual friendship or
a clash of personalities. We have all heard this old cliche and are aware that
a meeting of aliens would create a greater variation. So it is when two cul¬
tures meet. With a surprising regularity, chronicle after chronicle through¬
out the Americas mention that Indians at first greeted the European with
friendliness. One cannot help wondering what history would have recorded
if the Europeans had been greeted with spears, arrows, lances, and clubs in¬
stead of the gifts of hospitality. 16 In any event, we have ample proof that the
first contribution of the Indian was assistance in establishing colonies.

A second contribution was more of a “back door” gift. That is, Indian
defense of their lands forced the colonists to seek means of uniting for mu¬
tual defense. Thus, when the Revolution came, they were accustomed to
uniting for combat. Associated with this is the Albany Plan of Union pro¬
posed by Franklin. Franklin himself admits he acquired the plan from the
Iroquois. 17

One very important contribution of the Osages was of special value to
the United States. Desiring to keep the Southern portion of the Central
Plains trade for themselves and to prevent their enemies to the southwest
from securing fire arms, the Osages blockaded the area. Thus, the French and
then the Spanish were denied any real access to the three routes to the in¬
terior of North America west of the Mississippi. These routes were the Mis¬
souri and Arkansas River routes and the Overland Route across the Central
Plains, which later became the road to Santa Fe. This factor was a consid¬
eration in the decision to sell Louisiana to the United States. 18

In more recent years, a growing appreciation for the American Indian’s
views toward nature has come from the greater awareness of the need for
preserving the environment. 19 A universal rule among Indians is to leave no
sign of your use of the environment. This is a rule that should be adopted
by every citizen.

The clearest contribution made by Indians is in the arena of botany and
agriculture. Although to a great extent this also includes medicine and raw
material for manufacture, these may not stand out as clearly. Such items as
canoes, snowshoes, and signaling systems were also contributed by Indians,
but these too are not as clear cut. 2 " We will take up the Indian contribution
to agriculture next, and it will be clearly evident there that the Indian mer¬
its a larger role in American history than he has been allotted. He merits this
on agriculture alone, but when one examines his contributions in econom-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

450 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

ics, literature, and political thought, the great wrong in omitting the Indian
from history is all the more evident.

Agriculture

Background

One-half or more of the world’s food crops are derived from the Indian
civilization. Corn (maize) and potatoes (white potatoes) rank with rice and
wheat as the four most important food staples in the world. Manioc and
sweet potatoes (especially the yams variety) are close runners-up to the big
four.

Other leading food crops that came from Indians are peanuts, squashes,
red peppers, tomatoes, pumpkins, pineapples, avocados, cacao (a source of
chocolate), chicle (chewing gum), a large variety of beans, and other fruits
and vegetables. It is difficult to place an accurate number on the plants con¬
tributed by Indians. 21 Estimates run from eighty to over 200. Aside from the
food plants contributed by Indians, there are many medicinal and industrial
plants.

Industrial plants produce raw materials for manufacture. These plants are
not always food plants like peanuts and potatoes, which are also used as raw
material in manufacturing. Among the more important industrial plants are
long-staple cotton plants such as the Sea Island, Egyptian, and Upland va¬
rieties. Tobacco may also be included as an industrial plant, but it is also a
medicinal plant. Mauguary is a fiber plant used to make cordage of all
kinds. These are the best-known industrial plants of Indian origin, but there
are many more.

Medical plants introduced by Indians more than doubled the available
drugs of Western civilization. Some of these valuable plants are coco (a
source of cocaine), curare, cinchona bark, cascara sagrada, datura, and ephe¬
dra. 22 No matter how many Indian plants we list, one stands out above all
others and it has a clear Indian origin.

Corn or maize is the most domesticated of all the plants used by man,
and it is entirely dependent upon humans for its survival. Sometimes it is
difficult for Euro-Americans to realize that Indians were much better farm¬
ers in 1500 than the farmers of the Old World. Not only did they produce
more food in less space than European farmers, but they cultivated and used
a much greater variety of plants. But corn stood out as a universal crop
among Indians. Thus, it was extremely influential in Indian culture.

Land Tenure and Corn

Most important of the cultural influence of corn upon Indians was the sys¬
tem of land tenure that evolved from it. First of all, due to the Indian hunt-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 451

ing tradition, the ultimate control of how the land was to be used was in
the hands of the tribe. 23 Among the Osages, women were assigned land areas
for agriculture. The area was the womans to use for raising any crop she
wished. There was no unified system of land tenure among the Indians of
the United States. However, the different groups always had a logical well-
developed land system, and the ultimate control of its use rested upon a
group basis. 24

The uniqueness of corn has generated awe among those who appreciate
plants: “In its own way, and perhaps more beautifully, corn is a monument
to Man. Look at it the next time you have corn on the cob or are surprised
by one of those tiny ears of corn in your hors d’oeuvres at a cocktail party.
The ear is the ultimate in efficient food packaging, a highly specialized
flower cluster with hundreds of naked, energy-crammed seeds, compactly
arranged on a rigid cob enclosed in husks. Remarkable!” 25 One can well
understand the awe and respect generated by corn. In the 450 years Euro-
Americans have been in the Americas, they have not developed from its wild
growth a single major agricultural product. 2< ’

Amazing as it may seem, each grain of corn can produce three to four
hundred kernels. Even more amazing than this high productivity is the range
of conditions under which corn can be raised. Indians raised corn in hot,
wet lowlands and cool, dry highlands. 27 It grew from the Gulf of Mexico
to Canada and from the Atlantic to the Pacific. What was called Osage corn
grew a very tall stalk and usually had six ears to a stalk. These ears were
usually about nine-inches long with twenty-six or more rows.

Indian Agriculture Today

One would hardly believe that Indians, who were the world’s best agricul¬
turists in 1500, resisted being made into Euro-American-style farmers. The
difference was in the purpose and methods of farming. No matter how one
looks at Indians as farmers in the European sense, one must be aware that
domestic animals were unknown to the Indian of the United States. A mi¬
nor exception to this would be the dog, which had no agricultural use.

Human diet, despite fads, should include meat as well as vegetable foods.
This may be disputed on statistical grounds, but the facts are that man has
always sought nourishment from both sources. The absence of domestic ani¬
mals meant the Indian had to supply his meat wants by the hunt and had to
farm by human muscle alone. Thus, their farming methods differed greatly
from Old World farmers. The enslavement of animals was as repulsive to
Indians as the thought of a human owning the land. It took almost a com¬
plete destruction of Indian culture over a period of six or seven generations
to make indifferent Western-style farmers of Indians.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

452 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

Today, many Indians are farmers, especially in the drier regions of the
American West. Thus, Indians and water rights are an issue today. ‘With 75
percent of the reservation population and 55 percent of Indian lands located
in a region that receives less than twenty inches of precipitation annually,
water holds the key to economic development, including agriculture.” 28
Water is becoming increasingly in demand for household use, industrial use,
and recreational use. Indian lands offer the largest relatively undeveloped
areas available and, as such, offer the greatest potential for expansion of
water and water-related facilities.

Indians are still one of the country’s largest land-owning groups. In 1980,
Indians still controlled 52 million acres. Forty-two million acres of this was
still under tribal ownership but ten million acres of the total were under
individual management. 29 Indians have always been better at group activi¬
ties than at individual efforts. This is true of agriculture as well as their
ceremonies and business ventures.

The Osage success as grass lessor to the evolving beef industry was self
evident. While allotment in severalty destroyed this group business, some
Osages still engage in the grass business on an individual basis. Operation
of the mineral trust is a group venture, and it has worked well. One may say
the BIA managed both of these, but it is necessary to include Osage assent,
ideas, and participation, all of which contributed to their success. Our point
is that Indians should try to utilize their greatest strength. In agriculture,
Indians should evolve their own methods and not those borrowed from the
white man, for Indians are the experts, not the white man.

Gifts to the Old World

Three broad types of crops were used by Indians. One type was that of wild
plants, such as corn, that were altered to better fit the needs of man. A sec¬
ond type was those taken from the wild and simply cultivated in their natu¬
ral state. Avocados are an example of this type. The final type was taken and
used directly from the wild condition. Leaves, bark, roots, fiber, seeds, gums,
and saps were commonly gathered from wild plants. 3 " Pecans and walnuts
are also typical of this type.

Aside from corn, which is the world's leading crop, the white potato is
possibly the next Indian crop in importance. All one needs to do in order
to appreciate the importance of the potato is to read about the potato fam¬
ines in Ireland. The potato is produced in 130 of the 167 independent coun¬
tries of the world. One yearly crop is worth more in monetary terms than
all the gold and silver the Spanish took from the New World. Of over 5,000
potato varieties, at least 3,000 are still cultivated by Andean Indian farmers. 31

Three of the crops raised by North American Indians are being devel-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 453

oped for commercial agriculture. Johoba is now being cultivated in large
Arizona fields to be mainly used in lotions and other cosmetics. We first saw
guayle being grown during World War II. The latex from this shrub makes
an excellent rubber. It is still being cultivated for this purpose in the Ameri¬
can Southwest. Tepary beans are also being raised in the Southwest and they
show great promise for the dry land areas of the earth. 32

Many plants used by the prehistoric Osages are left off lists of Indian
plants. Those frequently omitted are anise, buckbrush, buckeye, cattail, dog¬
wood, Indian turnip, milkweed, poppy mallow, and wild onion. Anise was
treasured for its flavor. Buckbrush and cattail were used to make baskets and
mats. Buckeye was used ceremonially as a purgative, but the old people used
it as a pain killer as well. Most people are familiar with snake root or giant
cone flower. The Osage Little Yellow Flower is the little cone flower and its
roots make an excellent pain killer. Wild beans are usually listed as ground¬
nuts. Osages normally called this plant to or toe which means potato. French
traders called this plant “earth apple” or pomme de terre for the name of the
Pomrne de Terre River in Missouri where the Osages dug the roots of this
plant. The capital of Kansas—Topeka—is a Kaw-Osage word meaning Place
Where We Dug Potatoes. However, this same plant also produced the so-
called Osage beans or peas. Thus, both the seeds and roots were used.

We have never encountered any mention of the Osages using the ama¬
ranth plant. However, it would be unusual for their time and place if they
did not use it. In a detailed study, it was determined that the prehistoric
peoples of the Ohio Valley made little apparent use of the amaranth species
(pigweed) growing in that region. The most productive species are Ama¬
ranth Retroflexus and Amaranth Hypochondriacus. 33

“Amaranth has become one of the most important cereals in the diets of
highland peoples in India, China, Pakistan, Tibet, and Nepal. Cultivation has
spread so widely in the past century that Asia now cultivates and consumes
more amaranth than the Americas.” 34 We do not want to mislead the reader
into believing all Asian amaranth is Native American in origin. Amaranth
is also an East Indian plant, although some amaranth raised in Asia is Native
American in origin.

Economics

Land

Land is not as easily defined as it may first appear. As long as one restricts
the defining to the physical aspects of land, such as its acreage, the number
of trees, or tons of coal produced from the land, it is fairly easily defined.
However, when one crosses the hazy line between what is tangible and what
is intangible, land becomes difficult to define.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

454 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

Defining land as a homeland for a people is difficult to do. Measuring the
effect of a land upon the people which spring from it is not possible. While
we cannot place a measure on the effect of land, we know it plays a part in
shaping lifestyles. Without their homeland, a people lose their lifestyle and
become dislocated. For Indians, the loss of their homeland has meant the loss
of sustenance and a loss of place, but in a legal sense it has meant the extin¬
guishment of title to a continent. 35

Somewhere in the zone dividing the tangible and the intangible is the
effect of the extinguishment of the Indian title upon United States prop¬
erty laws. The condition that prevailed in Europe during the fifteenth cen¬
tury was totally changed—that is, changed from a society of limited lands
in the hands of a few people to a society of abundant land in the hands of
many. Such a revolutionary change in the nature of land holdings and its
effect upon the economy, politics, and social life of a civilization cannot be
ignored by historians who seek the truth.

Walter Prescott Webb describes the effects this change in the nature of
land holding had upon American property laws: “The flow of property from
hand to hand was a legal matter with legal ramifications too vast to be
explored here. All matters pertaining to titles, deeds, abstracts, conveyances,
inheritances, dowries, bequests, and wills came in ever-increasing volume
into the hands of lawyers and advocates and before judges and juries; and
these last two, however reluctantly, had in the long run no choice but to
bend the law to the will and convenience of the new owners. Of course, all
of these changes tie in closely with the gradual emancipation of the people.

. . . ” 36 The reference to emancipation of the people is an allusion to the
feudal system with its monarchies and limited freedom for the majority. An
abundance of cheap land completely destroyed the power of monarchies
and gave a greater freedom to the majority of people.

While most people in the Western civilization were gaining more free¬
dom, greater economic wealth, and a body of protective laws, the Osages
and other Indians were losing ground in these same areas. Thus, with more
than a grain of truth, it can be said that the rise of democracy in Western
civilization was bought at the expense of the Indian. A lesson for historians
and all others emerges from this: “It is quite likely that when we locate the
owners of the property in any society we shall not be far from those who
exercise the political authority—those who govern, and they govern regard¬
less of any theory to the contrary.” 37

The Osages made a distinction between the land and the earth. Land is
the top layer of the earth. The Siouan Crow say, “as deep as the roots go.”
Truly, he who holds the land rules the earth.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 455

The Frontier and Economic Theory

Adam Smith is sometimes called the father of capitalism. His Wealth of Na¬
tions became the basis for the great colonial empires of history. Ultimately,
his economic theories were valid, in the sense of workability, because of the
continuing frontier areas of the world. Among these was the land/cultural
frontier of the United States. Smiths concept of no regulation upon an
individual’s pursuit of wealth still has wide acceptance among some Ameri¬
can groups. However, this principle of “hands off” can only work when the
proportionate wealth per capita exceeds abundance. This overabundance was
a frontier situation generated by appropriation of the Indian estate.

The Osage experience with the “dog eat dog” aspects of “hands off”
capitalism made the council very cautious. Being aware that they were an
Indian-style communal organization, the council had to be especially alert.
The twentieth-century capitalistic world they functioned in made caution
especially necessary. Considering the hazards they faced, the council func¬
tioned admirably. 38 Thus, they proved that governments based on purely In¬
dian concepts can still function economically. It is in the area of human
relationships that this government has had its greatest failings, that is, in
serving the needs of the people in areas other than the economic.

Literature

The Indian and Literature

Without a doubt, the Indian was a romantic character in the European
mind. Discovery of the Americas and Indians stimulated the imagination of
European writers. Thus, the great Romantic period of European literature
and art was created. It is an old adage that writers reflect the society of their
time. Certainly this was true to some extent of the Indian frontier. Here
was an abundance of nourishment for the imagination to create thousands
of novel situations. All of Western civilization was stimulated in all fields of
learning and the arts.

To some extent, the Western civilization also stimulated the Indian. Al¬
though Indians already had a strong romantic thread woven into the fabric
of their culture, the white man’s world added new themes. Their contact
with Western people generated a comparison of the two cultures and pro¬
duced a new body of humor. One must remember that the Indian had no
written language, so his humor was acted out as he spoke. Indians already
had the romantic trait of wandering in strange worlds, and they never
adopted the impossible man-against-nature trait of Western Romanticism.
Indian romantic themes were sometimes tragic, but more often they ended

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

456 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

with an amusing “twist” or an all is well ending so characteristic of Western
Romantic literature.

Indian humor always cut away at dignity and pretense to greatness. West¬
erners were vulnerable targets for Indian humor. A keen sense of observa¬
tion and a mental pattern of seeing things as paired opposites created a large
body of Indian humor about the white man. Innate courtesy spared Western
man from exposure to this humor to any great extent. A classic example of
Indian humor that became popular in the United States was the humor of
Will Rogers. However, Euro-Americans never realized they were witness¬
ing a humor foreign to their culture. Peoples of Western civilization do not
normally laugh at themselves, for this requires a humility that is too often
absent in Western man.

Blending Two Worlds

Over a period of three hundred years, Western literature has more and more
blended Indian thoughts into their literature. This has become so thorough
that many will doubt what we wrote about the Will Rogers type of humor.
Where in the world could one find such tall tales as Paul Bunyon, Pecos Bill,
and Wind Wagon Smith except in a partly Indian culture. Even Voltaire’s
Candide shows an identifiable Indian humor. Such humor was new to West¬
ern civilization in Voltaire’s day, but now it is a part of Western civilization.

The blending of cultures and literature was a two-way road. Nowhere is
this more evident than in the growing vocabularies. For example, the Osages
had no name for the horse, so they called him a Shon ke C Tun ka or Big
Yellow Dog. Later exposure to the Spanish brought them the Spanish word,
caballo or cah buy yo. Thus, the Osage word Ka wa for horse was derived
from the Spanish word. Since the Osages did not originally have churches
in the Euro-American sense, they called a church Wa kon ta Tse or God’s
House.

Another group of new Osage words were caused by new goods from
Western civilization. The Osage words for the flintlock musket and guns
generally are examples of these words. Walt Ho tun Le Moh ka She ka (which
means Skunk Leg That Makes Them Cry Out) is the name of the first flint¬
locks the Osages saw. Wall Ho tun Le is the general name for any gun, and
it means Makes Them Cry Out. To the Western mind, this may seem to be
incomprehensible. Yet, the name fits the product, for when an animal is shot
it cries out. Early muskets had hammers shaped like a skunk’s hind leg. This
is hardly more incomprehensible than the American political term mug¬
wump, which was borrowed from the Iroquois. Americans interpret this as
meaning a politician with his mug on one side of the fence and his wurnp

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 457

on the other side. More simply put, a mugwump is a politician who speaks
in favor of one party but votes with the opposite party.

Frontier Literary Themes

The Indian influence can clearly be seen in the themes of Romanticism.
These themes are:

1) Primitive man and nature;

2) Eldorado;

3) Utopia;

4) Civilized man in isolation;

5) Man in conflict with nature. 39

It seems obvious that the Indian led writers to imagine themselves as a
primitive man. This led to tales about primitive conditions that bore little
relationship to Indian life. Few themes can equal the romance of Eldorado.
The possibility of discovering a place of incredible wealth captured the
imaginations of Western minds. Such wild stories led Cortez to Mexico;
Pizzaro to Peru; and Coronado in quest of the Seven Cities of Cibola and
Quivera. A variant of the Eldorado theme was Ponce de Leons search for
the Fountain of Youth, but then de Leon was an old man; old men dream of
youth and young men dream of riches.

If the Eldorado theme brought out stories well fertilized with imagina¬
tion, the Utopia theme was a product of greater fertility. FFere were found
a grand assortment of schemes for a perfect government with a perfect so¬
ciety. Long after the Indian and his culture had ceased to exert any great
influence, Hilton found his Lost Horizon in Tibet, which was his Utopia.

Surely, Daniel Defoe placed his Robinson Crusoe in isolation. This theme,
like all the frontier themes, goes back to the Indians who lived in isolation
from the Old World. Such themes stir the imagination in “what if” situa¬
tions. Some science fiction writers take up these themes and apply them to
the frontiers of space. I have forgotten the author, but as a boy I read a story
entitled Minimum Man. It was the Crusoe theme with a special “twist.”
Here was a true fumble-fingered failure who was sent to live alone on a
small planet. The thought was, if he could survive, anyone could. Of course,
his robot, Friday, was there to protect him from any real harm. However,
Friday was also programmed to create problems.

When we speak of man in conflict with nature, we are not speaking
about Indians. Surely, the idea of humans living in nature is Indian. While
Indians probably inspired the theme, it was Western writers that supplied the

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

458 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

application. Later we find the fabulous tales of the wild by Jack London.
While we always enjoyed such tales, it was a little horrifying to see a puny
human throwing himself against nature. The sheer audacity was enough to
shock the reader into pursuing the story to the end.

What, then, does all this mean? Now that the frontier is gone and only
tatters of Indian culture remain, where has man’s imagination gone? Possi¬
bly Webb has the answer: “Man again has been turned back on himself to
find his romance and adventure. If we may judge by current manifestations,
literature is no longer concerned with man caught between an old world
that is curious and a new one that is excitingly strange. It becomes more and
more subjective, and seems to be concerned mainly with whether man is all
sex or all psychology.” 40

Political Thought
Indian Political Influence

“Indian social and political concepts and structures profoundly influenced
settlers and Old World philosophers alike and played a significant role in the
evolution of many modern institutions of government and daily life.” 41
This statement of Indian political influence includes not only the United
States and the democratic nations of the world, but it also includes the
Communistic bloc of nations.

Lewis Henry Morgan wrote several influential pieces of literature. Possi¬
bly the most significant was his Ancient Society. His argument that primitive
societies were family-oriented while modern societies were property-based
appealed to Karl Marx. To Marx, this seemed to confirm his dialectal, ma¬
terialistic view of history. Since Marxism is based on this view of history,
it is natural that Morgan would be viewed as one of the basic creators of
modern communism. 42

Morgans massive Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Fam¬
ily has thousands of different kinship terms from hundreds of the world’s
societies. Among these are 167 Osage kinship terms collected in the mid-
1800s. 43 Morgan spent a large portion of his life among Indians and based
much of his writing on what he knew of Indian life. This Indian influence
upon modern communism is often overlooked.

It is more common to find the Indian influence upon natural rights men¬
tioned than the influence on communism. Montesquieu, Locke, and Rous¬
seau all wrote about the “noble savage” or “natural man.” To what degree
the Indian influenced their thinking and the downfall of monarchies is de¬
batable. However, the fact of Indian influence is undeniably present. 44 Donald
Grinde points out that “Paradoxically, the whites who came to America

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 459

sought to subdue, enslave, or exterminate this free and natural society, pri¬
marily for economic gain.” 43

Philosophic Contributions

The deductions of the philosophers about the Indians were not entirely
wrong. Belief in the freedom and dignity of the individual was deeply
ingrained in many Indian societies. . . . Among many tribes, also, coun¬
cils decided on courses of action by unanimous, rather than majority,
agreement; the feelings and opinions of each person were considered
too important to override. Such influences, reflecting the equality of
individuals and respect for their rights, made their mark on the Euro¬
pean philosophers. 46

The slogans of the American Revolution (1775) and the French Revolution
(1789) reflect the Indian influence. For the Americans, the cry of Life, Lib¬
erty, and Happiness became the objective of revolution. In France, the goal
became Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood. While it would be interesting
to pursue the difference of intentions, the common purpose demands our
attention. Liberty was a dead lifeless word before Indians gave it life and
vitality.

Search the philosophies prior to 1500 for the modern meaning of liberty
and your labor would be in vain. The concept of universal “bosslessness” for
all (that is, freedom to pursue one’s desires without hindrance for one’s self
and all others alike) came from the Indians. Association of life with liberty
goes back to such principles as the Osage practiced. No life could be taken
without adequate reason. This applied to humans, animals, and plants. Within
the tribe no person could be deprived of his life until after all other alter¬
natives had failed, assuming, of course, there was just cause for execution.

The French associated liberty with equality. However, as Anatole France
once noted, “rich and poor alike are hung for sleeping under bridges.” His
point was, although laws may be applied equally, they could still be unjust.
Only the poor would have a need to sleep under bridges. For this reason, all
laws must be tempered by justice. The Osage example also serves here, for
even when a person had violated a law every effort was made to find some
form of restitution rather than taking his life.

Fraternity or the brotherhood of man is purely Indian in practice. Only
societies “bonded” together can rule without coercion and still allow its
members free choice. The tribal bond is rooted in a mutual kinship that has
tied even unrelated members together. It is akin to E Pluribus Unum or the
old Roman fasces, but it is more of a social unity that dictates political

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

460 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

choices. This is in contrast to political unity that dictates social choices. The
unanimity rule is a social dictate and, thus, it is the ultimate in governmen¬
tal equality.

Like the tribal bond, happiness is a social state or condition. Thus, the
economic condition has little to do with happiness. Possibly, happiness is a
wrong choice of terms for contentment.

But, as he makes clear in the notes to the Discourse on Inequality, Rous¬
seau believed two points of view were in conflict here, rather than
contradictory ethnographical evidence: Yes, the savages were “poor” in
a material sense in comparison to Europeans, but not a single savage
had yet been persuaded to take up European “civilization” as a way
of life, while thousands of Frenchmen and other Europeans had sought
“voluntary refuge among these Nations, there to spend their entire
lives. . . . The recognition of happiness,” concluded Rousseau, setting
the birth of the Romantic movement in one short line, “is less the
business of reason than of feeling. 47

Thus, life, liberty, happiness, equality, and unanimity which set the thrones
of the world aside were all political concepts derived from the American
Indian.

Forming the United States

Felix Cohen, late international authority on Indian law and polity, has
stated that “American democracy, freedom and tolerance are more
American than European and have deep aboriginal roots in our land.”

The Indian example of self-determinism and local sovereignty “un¬
doubtedly played a strong role in helping to give the colonists new sets
of values that contributed to turning them from Europeans into free¬
dom loving Americans.” And it is out of a rich Indian democratic tradi¬
tion that the distinctive political ideals of American life emerged, includ¬
ing the practice of treating leaders “as servants of the people instead of
as their masters,” and the “insistence that the community must respect
the diversity of men and the diversity of their dreams.” 48

One of the unexplained mysteries of the American Revolution was how the
ordinary, illiterate colonist became so well informed about the natural rights
of men. Anyone who has labored through Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, and
the natural rights philosophers can appreciate the difficulty of comprehend¬
ing their arguments. Yet, here were illiterate people with an extraordinary
comprehension of complex philosophic discourse. Since they could not read

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 461

or write, nor had extensive contact with scholars familiar with philosophic
discourse, one naturally has reason to ask where and how they acquired such
knowledge.

The answer should be obvious. Colonists had constant contact with In¬
dians. Through sheer necessity, they copied many Indian techniques of liv¬
ing in the American back country. It is equally obvious that they also
adopted many Indian concepts of government and treatment of each other.
The philosophies of natural rights as derived from the Indian were theory,
but the ordinary colonist was living under these principles as they drifted to
revolution.

Thomas Jefferson was a keen observer of the Indian and his ways, as well
as a natural rights scholar. His views are well represented in the following
quote: “As for France and England, with all their preeminence in science,
the one is a den of robbers, and the other of pirates, as if science produces
no better fruits than tyranny, murder, rapine and destitution of national mo¬
rality, I would rather wish our country to be ignorant, honest, and estimable
as our neighboring savages are.” 49

As one proceeds through American history up to 1900, the Indian in¬
fluence is always present. In the colonial period, it was the Indian that forced
the colonists to unite for mutual defense. Certainly, the Iroquois furnished
the model for the Albany Plan of Union and even addressed the delegates
on the benefits of union. While this plan was not adopted, many Iroquois
methods found their way into Euro-American legislatures—congressional
compromises on bills, for example.

The whole key to American government was summed up in a statement
by Thomas Jefferson and it is pure Indian in principle: “The fool has as great
a right to express his opinion by vote as the wise, because he is free and
equally master of himself.” 50 Populists in the Agrarian Revolt of the late-
1800s also took concepts from the Indian. Populists believed in direct de¬
mocracy as opposed to representative democracy. This was reflected in the
demand for the initiative, referendum, and recall. They had a slogan which
was related to Jefferson’s comment. “We pay for governmental mistakes, so
let us make our own mistakes.”

Profusion and Confusion

Chief Justice John Marshall set the stage in 1831 for the ultimate assump¬
tion of Indian sovereignty by the United States. In this decision, the court
held that the Indian governments were “domestic dependent nations.” While
this admitted the Indian nations had a status above the individual states, it
opened the door for a drain of sovereignty by Supreme Court edict.

In the process of reducing sovereignty and increasing the dependency of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

462 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

the Indian nations, a body of highly specialized Indian laws was created.
Indian law is an entirely different arena from the criminal and civil codes
of our federal and state governments. It is an arena where the Constitution
was twisted and distorted by what the majority wanted from the Indian. It
is an arena where if the concepts of the Bill of Rights are applied at all they
are hardly recognizable.

We do not have the space to become enmeshed in the great profusion
and confusion of Indian law. In lieu of this, we will close this topic with a
quote. “This bureaucratic paternalism hems the Indian in with an incom¬
prehensible maze of procedures and regulations, never allowing him to
know quite where he stands or what he can demand and how. Over 5000
laws, statutes and court decisions apply to the Indians alone. As one Indian
student says, ‘our people have to go to law school just to live a daily life.’ ” 51

THE OLD AND THE NEW MEET
Indians and Western Civilization
The Different Minority

Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall created a task force on Indian affairs
in 1961. 52 In a report of this task force, it was noted that Indians differed
from other minorities in three ways. The first of these was a very special trait
of culture and identity preservation. This extends beyond the normal cul¬
tural preservation of other minorities. Secondly, Indians are a quasi-sover¬
eign people. They had rights guaranteed by treaty and often had lands set
aside for their exclusive use. Also, there is a body of special federal laws that
apply only to Indians. Lastly, Indians have a partially dependent relationship
with the federal government.

While discrimination against Indians is seldom as intense as that against
African Americans, there are some situations and places where it becomes
very intense. Frequently, this discrimination shows some economic cause.
However, surprising as it may seem, some discrimination comes from people
who once considered themselves friends of the Indian.

Most of these are former reformers who had sought to bring the Indian
into the American society by assimilation. Indian resistance to their efforts
eventually discouraged and then disillusioned these “do-gooders.” In reac¬
tion to their rejection, these people reversed their feelings and became In¬
dian haters.

It is this very thing that seemingly makes the Indian so incomprehensible
to the non-Indian. How can a person who considers his own lifestyle, his
own government, and his own society to be far above any other compre¬
hend that not all Americans agree with him? If the present majority culture

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 463

in America expects to survive the twenty-first century, it must realize that
other cultures are entitled to be as proud of their heritage as the majority
culture is of theirs. We, in this great nation of ours, must accept the right of
others to be different in their own way.

Willingness to accept differences in other people was a characteristic of
the Osage people. When they merged with smaller groups, which often
happened, the majority adjusted to the minority so the new people would
feel comfortable and welcome. That is, they adopted many minority ways
of doing things. Western civilization has much to learn about living with
others.

Possibly, there is a hidden guilt feeling mixed in with the desire to as¬
similate the Indian. Resistance to the efforts to assimilate him has produced
frustration, because the Indian is still here and is still a different people.
They are separate and apart from all others in the nation. Their presence is
a goad which keeps the American conscience in a state of penance. No one
enjoys such a role, and so the feelings of discrimination arise. Is it not pos¬
sible for the Indian to reach accommodation without assimilation?

Certainly, this is what is happening; the Indian is accommodating him¬
self to the majority culture. That is, he is adapting and blending elements of
both cultures rather than becoming identical with the majority culture. It is
possible that all Americans will eventually follow this same course. If that
should happen, it would be a great source of new ideas. New ideas are prod¬
ucts of diversity and not of uniformity.

Indian Traits

Nowhere are Indian traits more evident than at a social gathering among
strangers. In such situations, a person from an Indian culture will be very
quiet and almost seem to blend into the background. People from the major¬
ity culture act entirely differently. They move from group to group exchang¬
ing small talk until they find a place in which they are at ease. Meanwhile,
the person from the Indian culture is studying each group and individual.
When he is satisfied and has determined where he would be compatible, he
immediately attaches himself to that group and soon becomes a contribut¬
ing member.

These approaches to strange situations are symptomatic of two utterly
different cultures. The Indian has a deliberate approach to life. He plans each
major change with care, collecting all available information. If he determines
that success is not probable he will not pursue that direction in life, but he
will pursue with all his abilities a promising direction. Western people, how¬
ever, are inclined to enter a situation and to try various directions until
eventually they discover one that works for them. The difference here is

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

464 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

“exploring with the mind,” as the Old Osages called it, and exploring with
physical action. Western man is a pragmatist; Indians are realists with a
strong dose of idealism.

People from the majority culture tend to form opinions about new ac¬
quaintances upon first contact. This places a person raised in an Indian cul¬
ture at a disadvantage. In job interviews, the Indian seems overly shy, with¬
drawn, and somewhat restricted in intelligence. However, once he is employed,
he far exceeds the expectations of the personnel officer who hired him.

Unfortunately, these hidden beneficial talents, which so often please em¬
ployers, have another side. Generally, Indians do not give any outward sign
when they are slighted or wronged. After a variable time and with repeated
occurrence, the Indian will sometimes erupt into a violent reaction. To the
Western mind, it seems the Indian has reacted violently to a minor provo¬
cation and, thus, the Indian gets a reputation for being “touchy” and “hard
to get along with.”

The old majority ways of shaking hands and looking a person “square in
the eye” are as out of place among Indians as the “slap on the back” for a
job well done. Most Indians consider staring into another’s eyes extremely
bad manners. It is a disrespectful invasion of one’s body, as is the slap on the
back. Thus, when an Indian evades meeting another’s eyes it is a sign of
respect and good manners.

School teachers of Indian children must not judge their Indian pupils by
Western standards. Indian children are taught not to ask questions; they are
expected to observe and learn, not to interrupt the ongoing process with
questions. It is very bad manners for a younger person to interrupt an older
person with a question or comment. Often, an older person will shame a
younger person who interrupts them. To be shamed is a severe punishment.

Special Osage traits

We must state at the outset that other Indians have at least some of these
traits. However, these are the special traits by which the Osages are known.
Generosity is a general Indian trait, as is the acceptance of generosity. The
Osages are known for this trait because, by good fortune, they have had the
means to be generous. As Osage wealth increased, so did their generosity.
Other, less fortunate, Indian people were invited to lavish ceremonies in
which needed gifts were bestowed upon them. Great care was taken not to
shame those who received gifts. In fact, this is the hallmark of true gener¬
osity, that is, to bestow a gift in honor and not in shame.

Possibly, the Osage trait of aloofness is the most persistent Osage trait.
Apparently this aloofness ran stronger in the Osage than in other Indian
people. The French, Spanish, and early American explorers all made a special

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 465

association of this trait with the Osages. It is as if the Osages knew they
were a people apart from all other people. Throughout their recorded his¬
tory, they have been a people apart. Although they have shared to some ex¬
tent the same pattern as other Indians, they have also developed a pattern of
differences. One does not need to look very far for evidence of this. There
are more federal laws and regulations applying only to the Osages than for
any other Indian nation or American minority group.

The Cherokees sometimes claim the Osages were not invited to join the
so-called Five Civilized Tribes. Yet, the Osages claim they were invited to
join but did not accept the invitation because they wanted to maintain their
identity as Osages. Because of the Osage aloofness and their long history of
avoiding Indian alliances, we must say the Osage view has a ring of truth.

It was a matter of some anguish and a bitter draught to the Osage agents
in the late-i8oos that the Osages could afford to stand aloof from the efforts
to “civilize” them. The agency office force contained all white persons at
that time. How it must have galled them when a “dirty Indian” apparently
looked down upon them as servants. The Osages did not look upon the
office force as servants, but they did treat them with haughtiness and aloof¬
ness. New employees soon learned that they could not treat the Osages as
Indians were treated at other agencies. Anyone who has never witnessed a
“tongue lashing” by an Osage woman or a haughty, aloof “freeze” by an
Osage man may have difficulty understanding why the Osage agency was
different.

Osage dancing displays other Osage traits. Around the year 1885, mem¬
bers of the Kon sa (Kaw or Kansas) nation visited with the Osages. They
stayed throughout the winter teaching the Osages a dance. Fearful that their
people were dying out and their dance would be lost, the Kaw were passing
their drum and dance to the kindred Osage people. Since that time, the
Osages have danced that dance every year. The dress of 1885 is still worn
with very minor if any changes. The dance too is still the same.

The E Ion schscali (Playground of the Eldest Son) is danced each spring.
One should not expect to see elaborate fanciful costumes at these dances,
although it should be noted that some dancers from other tribes do wear
such clothing and do subdued fancy dances. Fancy headdresses and enor¬
mous bustles are notable by their absence. Wild body gyrations, strangely
called “fancy dancing,” is likewise prohibited. What one sees at these dances
are fully clothed dancers, in a combination of somber and bright colors. All
Osage dancers move erect in a counterclockwise direction, with the men to
the inside and the women to the outside. The counterclockwise direction is
to commemorate the rotation of the earth. The dancers stand erect, not
crouched, keeping time with the “voice of thunder” (the ancient Kaw drum),

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

466 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

the singers, and the clash of “panther teeth” (bells). 53 Men dance toe to heel
on alternate feet and women from heel to toe on alternate feet.

At these dances, at least three Osage traits are evident. One is their love
of tradition and the acceptance of the responsibility to keep the gift, given
by the Kaw, alive and vital. Another is their seriousness, devotion, and ab¬
sence of flashiness. A final trait that is revealed is their deep reverence, even
to the old religion which they have mainly abandoned except for this dance
and some adaptations in the Peyote Church.

Indian Ways
Living and Getting

A part of “the great conversation” deals with the question of, What is the
purpose of life? Associated with this profound question is: How should man
live? Like most of “the great conversation,” man has not found any absolute
answers to these questions. However, it would seem logical that man was not
given life to destroy life and the earth. To reason otherwise would seem to
cancel out the purpose of creating life.

In comparing the approaches to living as it was practiced in the Indian
civilizations with living in Western civilization, it would seem the Indian
was more logical than the Westerner. The Oriental civilization discovered
that if they placed a mixture of saltpeter, sulphur, and charcoal in a restricted
space and ignited it, an explosion would occur. Western man took the fire¬
cracker and parleyed it into an explosive that could destroy humanity. How
logical is it to create a destructive force capable of destroying all life?

It seems obvious that some force impels Western people toward destruc¬
tion. We sometimes wonder if the obsession to acquire “things” becomes a
substitute for living. We wonder if Westerners worship idols of their own
creation instead of the creations in the natural world around them. We be¬
lieve the purpose of life lies in the sound of living water seeking the sea. It
is in the voices of the newborn and in the passing of life. It is beneath our
feet and above our head; we have the purpose of life around us. It is to
live—to be!

This is a basic difference between Indians and Euro-Americans—the In¬
dian made “living” the basis of his culture; the white man made “getting”
the basis of his culture. Competition, one human vying with another, hu¬
man against nonhuman, human conquest of nature, and human victorious
over the Gods are popular themes in the literature of Western civilization.
With the Indian, competition is a sport, an entertainment but not a way of
life. Like most things in life, competition is neither good nor bad. The Stoics
would have said competition is evil only in excess. It is the excess of com-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 467

petition in Western life that causes the greatest threat to the survival of
Western civilization.

This is certainly evident in education. Stress is placed on getting an edu¬
cation to get ahead in the world by enabling a person to get more pay so he
or she can get more of the things the culture has to offer. In the majority
educative system one often hears the warning that one is in competition
with other young people. The getting and competition themes worry young
people, but they do not seem to motivate youths to strive for excellence.

To most Indians, Western education is a horrible experience. Yet it does
not seem to be as extreme as some writers phrase it. “Our education seems
[to the Indian] to consist in knowing how most effectually to cheat them;
our civilization in knowing how to pander to the worst propensities of na¬
ture, and then beholding the criminal and inhuman results with a cold in¬
difference—a worse than heathen apathy; while our religion is readily
summed up in the consideration of dollars and cents.” 54

Possibly, the clearest distinction between the Indian “living” and the Eu¬
ropean “getting” is in hunting. The Indian hunted as a way to live; the Euro¬
pean hunted to get trophies or to see how many animal lives could be taken.
The Duke of Henneberg in 1581 killed 1,003 red deer in one season. Three
years later, the Elector of Saxony slew 1,532 wild boars during November. 55
One may call this sport if they wish, but it is the wholesale taking of life
with no other purpose than to acquire a record for the number of animals
slain.

The Land

The Indian veneration for the land sprung from an acute awareness of the
importance of the land. Traditionally, the Indians’ love of the land and the
Europeans’ love of the land were based on separate reasons. Indians loved
the land because it supported all life. Europeans loved the land because it
represented position and power. Significantly, the Indian love of the land led
to preserving it as near to a natural condition as possible, but the Europeans’
love pushed the land to the limits of its potential.

Because of the background of Western civilization, Euro-Americans
viewed the pristine condition of the land under Indian tenure as evidence
of their backwardness and savagery. Using the argument that the land should
belong to those who could and would bring it to the highest use, the Indian
lands were seized. Like a terrible epidemic, Euro-Americans spread over the
land destroying all they touched.

It has been truly noted that all living things depend on the first six
inches of the earth’s surface. In this sense, mankind is only six inches from

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

468 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

annihilation. We learned in conservation courses that enough silt is carried
by the Missouri River each year to cover its drainage basin with four inches
of soil. Most of this silt comes from the Euro-American practice of open
tillage agriculture. The Indian used closed tillage. That is, they only culti¬
vated the area immediately around the plant they were raising, leaving an
area between the plants in native vegetation. By contrast, Euro-Americans
plow every square inch and cultivate the entire area. The difference un¬
doubtedly grew out of the availability of animal power. With animal power
and mechanical power, it is easier to cultivate the whole area devoted to a
crop than selected areas. The reverse is true without animal or mechanical
power.

Three things happen to precipitation that comes to the earth. These are
fly off, cut off, and run off. Fly off is the moisture that evaporates. Cut off
is the moisture that sinks into the ground and either moistens the earth or
forms the water table. Run off is the moisture that searches for the sea and
in doing so forms the continental drainage system. Open tillage increases
the run off percentage, and in doing so it throws the mechanics of nature
out of harmony and, thus, creates gigantic destruction to the six inches of
survival soil.

We must question the validity of the highest-use argument, whether it
be in the economic, social, or political sense. The most efficient is rarely the
best of choices. Instead of basing decisions on efficiency and profit, Western¬
ers must come around to the Indian practice of making decisions on the
basis of dislocation of natural forces. This would require the development of
a new field of learning. Possibly it would be the study of harmony in nature,
that is, the balances in nature and in societies interacting upon each other.

Resistance to Change
Indians and the American Dream

What has been called the American dream is a hazy concept. We will try to
capture at least the spirit of the dream. As a first requirement, the great
American “melting pot” must create from its diverse peoples a single united
nation of a new race—Americans. A second requirement of the dream is
that there shall be liberty and justice for all. The final requirement is that all
shall be equally and fairly represented and have an equal and fair voice in
government. It is a simple dream and it will possibly remain a dream. Re¬
ality reveals that of all governments in Western civilization, this govern¬
ment has come the nearest to fulfilling the dream. Possibly, it is because it is
rooted in soil that once saw humans living the American dream.

While the “melting pot” evolved in Indian Country, the Indian has been

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 469

the most difficult ingredient to accommodate and assimilate into the com¬
mon Euro-American culture. This presents an embarrassment to the United
States. If, after two hundred years of effort, the United States cannot hon¬
orably “get out of the Indian business,” why not? More to the point is why,
despite two hundred years of effort, is the Indian neither accommodated nor
assimilated into the general mass of Americans?

The answer is so obvious that it is embarrassing to point it out. Indians
simply do not want to be assimilated into the oblivion of becoming lost
souls in the general mass of Americans. They are the first Americans and
they have every intention of remaining not only the first Americans but
also the last Americans. Indians have always welcomed new people and at
times even adopted the ways of the new people to make them feel comfort¬
able. However, there are limits and among these is an unwillingness to be¬
come the same as the new people. Above all else, an Indian must remain
himself. Diogenes was looking in the wrong place for his authentic (hon¬
est?) man; he should have looked in the wickiups of America.

Change and Constancy

Goethe touched on the core of change: “Whate’er you have, bequeathed
you by your father, earn it in order to possess it.” The essence of change is
the past, for all change is based on past experience. However, as Goethe has
noted, one must earn what one inherits in order to possess it. That is, people
may inherit a culture but unless they live the culture it cannot be theirs.
Likewise, a solution to a problem can never be fully understood unless a
person makes the solution his or her very own through living it. If the
solution is not lived, it becomes “cultural baggage” that is carried without
purpose or reason except that it is there. Thus, when the problem arises again
in later generations a solution is recreated and the solution becomes a vital
living force. However, the recreation can never be the same as the original
since no one living fully comprehends the original.

If this concept were applied to ordinary life sequence, it would explain
many cultural changes. Insofar as changes within a culture are concerned,
the need for change, by inference, arises from within as well. We cannot fault
the concept that faulty transmission of a culture from generation to genera¬
tion is a powerful motivation for cultural revolution from within. However,
this leads us to consider the nature of change from without the culture, that
is, changes imposed by outside forces.

In a culture such as the Osage culture of the 1700s, the transmission of
solutions from generation to generation was extremely efficient. While in¬
ternal revolt did take place, these events were rare. In most cases it was prob-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

470 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

ably the food supply problems that forced the revolts within the culture. Yet,
the stress placed upon having respect for elders suggests a strong exchange
of concepts from the older generation to a younger generation. Under these
conditions, each new generation lives and comprehends the ideas of the
older generation so well that they too possess the old culture.

A beautiful expression of the general idea we are trying to convey has
been written by Fey and McNickle: “In this matter of change, people are
like the grass. They toss and sway and even seem to flow before the forces
that make for change, as grass bows to the wind. But when the rude forces
move on, people are found still rooted in the soil of the past. Again, like
grass, people produce seed; and the seed will fly with the wind and, finding
a friendly soil and climate, start a new generation. To change, yet to remain
steadfast—that would seem to be the need of all living things.” 56

Few peoples have experienced the forces of change as severely as that
forced upon the Indian. All Indian history must deal with this overwhelm¬
ing fact of forced change by an alien people. An interesting comment on
this facet of living is made by Ortega: “Imitation of alien political institu¬
tions betrays a pathological state of society. A people cannot take its institu¬
tions from the manifest surface of foreign nations; it must discover them in
its own innermost being if it wants to lead a life in freedom. Freedom can¬
not be achieved by proclaiming a few random liberties. Life in liberty pre¬
supposes a perfect continuity of circulation throughout the collective body,
from the heart of its common belief to the skin which is the state, and back
from the skin to the bowels of faith.” 57

Faith is the instinctive acceptance of tradition. This enables people to
escape the terrible task of rethinking their inherited past and, thus, making
it their own. So long as we live by faith, only minor change can take place.
When man is forced to a loss of faith he becomes isolated and torn from his
past. He has only himself and his own efforts to find and create a new
security in a culture of his own making. Thus, the Osages and many other
Indians are a new culture of two worlds.

Osages in Two World Wars
World War I

Osages are sometimes critical of the United States, as are most Indians. Yet,
only a person with a limited gift of comprehension could mistake this as
evidence of a lack of loyalty or love of this country. For such persons who
mistake criticism for treason we have included this section.

In a Fourth of July, 1924, speech, Thomas J. Leahy described the role of
Osages in the First World War. Some points he presented are brought out
here. One must realize that in 1918 when the United States went to war in

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 471

Europe, the Osages were not citizens of the United States. They were not
citizens during the Civil War and the Spanish American War either, but they
still served the United States government. Draft notices were sent out to
male Osage citizens even though they were not United States citizens and
were under no legal or moral obligation to accept the draft. There is not a
single case on the record of any Osage failing to respond to the draft in any
American war.

Leahy mentioned this in his address. He added the further bit of infor¬
mation that one in four Indian males of fighting age either responded to the
draft or volunteered for service in World War I. Leahy further noted that the
Osage ratio itself, which was given as one in three, exceeded the national
ratio. This fact does not have the ring of disloyalty, nor can it be considered
as a lack of love for the country.

With all due respect to the Navajo Marines I served with in World War
II, it must be mentioned that the “code talkers” of that second worldwide
conflict did not originate in that war. The Oklahoma tribes, including the
Osage, were the original “code talkers” in World War I. They did not have
radio but used field telephones. German technicians who tapped into the
lines could not crack the Native American code.

Osages not only placed their lives on the line for this country but they
also put valuable property at the disposal of the government at no charge.
No one could predict which direction combat would come from. In Amer¬
ica’s previous war experience, the Spanish American War, combat had pri¬
marily been upon the seas. With this in mind, the Osage people took what
was then the most productive oil pool they possessed and gave it to the
United States government as a Naval Reserve. This was probably the largest
economic donation to the war effort made during World War I.

As things turned out, the United States was not involved in any exten¬
sive naval combat in World War I, so the reserve was not needed. In 1927,
the Navy Department returned the Naval Reserve to the Osage people. The
United States never used the reserve during the ten years they had it. In the
ten years after its return to the Osages, the Naval Reserve produced
18,000,000 barrels of oil. During the ten years the Reserve was owned by
the United States, oil averaged $2.15 a barrel. After making all allowances,
this would be a gift of over $20,000,000 to the United States. 58

World War II

Their war service and United States citizenship notwithstanding, Osages
who served in World War II could not obtain loans under the Servicemens
Readjustment Act of 1944. A special Act of Congress (61 Stat. 747) was
enacted to enable Osage veterans of World War II to receive this benefit. I

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

472 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

was one of the first Osages to benefit from this Act of August 4,1947. One
who is neither Indian nor Osage cannot realize how often the tangle of laws
affect an Osages life.

The Osage record in World War II, as given in a BIA report, is, with
much pride, reproduced below:

Agency records indicate that 519 members of the Osage Tribe served
in the armed forces during World War II, and of that number 26 were
either killed in action or while in training, one is still missing in ac¬
tion, and nine were awarded decorations for meritorious service, as
follows: Air Medal, one; Air Medal and Oak Leaf Clusters, one; Distin¬
guished Service Medal, one; Good Conduct Medal, one [many more
were later reported]; Distinguished Flying Cross, two; Silver Star,
three; and Purple Heart, 15. Of the total number serving, 261 were in
the Army; n in the Navy, 26 in the Marines, one in the Coast Guard,

97 in Army Air Force, two in Merchant Marine; one was a Navy Nurse,
two were Army Nurses, 12 were in the WAC, four in the WAVES, and
two were in the U.S. Womens Marines. Commissioned officers in¬
cluded one major general (lost in action), one major (lost in action),
seven captains, 27 lieutenants,seven ensigns,four lieutenants (j.g.), two
army nurse lieutenants, and one navy nurse lieutenant—a total of 50.
Noncommissioned officers included 23 sergeants and 24 corporals. 59

By far, the best known Osage to serve in World War II was Major General
C. L. Tinker: “On June 7,1942 the General and his crew of ten were lost in
action while leading a group of LB-30 bombers on a mission against the
Japanese retreating toward Wake Island.” 60

Mixed-Bloods
Cultural Blending

It was natural that when the two cultures met there would be children born
of both cultures. Since most of the first contacts Indians had with the Euro-
Americans were with men, all the early mixed-bloods had Euro-American
fathers and Indian mothers. Even after Euro-American women came into
contact with Indians, there were few mixed-blood children with white
mothers. Most of those who existed by 1850 were primarily born of white
captive mothers who had been adopted into the tribe.

This factor of parental sex is often overlooked in studies of Indian ac¬
commodation. In nearly all cultures, the mothers are the most powerful
force of tradition. Possibly, this is because they need safe and secure “nests”
in which to bear children. Hence, it is quite possible that women favor tra¬
dition over the turmoil of change.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 473

In any event, in the Osage society, women are the greatest influence on
a new human s life. During the first five years, the mother is practically the
only major force shaping the child’s life. Whatever follows this first five
years would of necessity need to be a potent force to overthrow the culture
ingrained by the mother. If our conception has any validity, mixed-bloods
with Indian mothers would have stronger ties to Indian culture than those
with white mothers. However, we must also point out that among mixed-
bloods, many white wives who had courage and love enough to marry a
mixed-blood man often became the strongest champions of Indian ways.

Alexis de Tocqueville comments on mixed-bloods in his Democracy in
America (1835): “Unhappily, the mixed race has been less numerous and less
influential in North America than in any other country. The American con¬
tinent was peopled by two great nations of Europe, the French and the En¬
glish. The former were not slow in connecting themselves with the daugh¬
ters of the natives, but there was an unfortunate affinity between the Indian
character and their own: instead of giving the tastes and habits of civilized
life to the savages, the French too often grew passionately fond of Indian
life.” 61 While we agree with de Tocqueville, we must point out that although
most mixed-bloods followed the Indian culture they still retained some
French culture. This became overshadowed by their predominant Indian-
ness. Among the Osages, the French-Osages tended to congregate together
in a half-breed band. Approximately one-fourth of the French-Osages lived
with the full-blood bands. Although the half-breed band was predominantly
Osage in culture, it still incorporated many French social activities. Virtually
all of this band were bilingual (Osage and French), but French was the lan¬
guage of preference among the mixed-bloods.

With the coming of the Americans in 1803, a need to speak American
English grew greater. Thus, by 1850, most Osage-French mixed-bloods
were trilingual (Osage, French, and American English). Between 1850 and
1870, an increasing number of marriages with Americans lessened the at¬
traction of both French and Osage language and customs. By the twentieth
century, only a few older mixed-bloods spoke French. All younger mixed-
bloods spoke American English. Only rarely did one speak French, and
equally rare was an Osage-speaking mixed-blood. Thus, the blending of
cultures was spread over a two hundred year period.

The Non-People

The metis (French-Indian mixed-blood) of Canada and the metis among
the Osages share much the same history until 1800. As de Tocqueville so
aptly noted, the metis of North America did not occupy the same position
of the mestizo (Spanish-Indian mixed-blood) in Latin America. That is,
they did not exert the influence that mixed-bloods did in other lands.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

474 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

Possibly, this is because the predominant stock of Latin America is the
mestizo. In North America, the metis and English-Indian mixed-bloods are
a minority of a minority. “As late as 1980, one such group in Canada could
refer to themselves, not without irony, as North America’s ‘non-people.’ ” 62

The basic distinction between the Canadian metis and the metis of mid-
United States hinges on the Louisiana Purchase. That is, with the coming of
the alien Americans the Osage metis lost contact with the French influence.
This threw them more to an Osage identification since the American cul¬
ture was totally alien to them. Thus, in mid—America the mixed-bloods
tended to lose their metis identity and to increase their Osage identity. Al¬
though both the Canadian metis and the Osage metis have become a “non¬
people,” they have reached this status in a different context.

Osage Tribal Composition

“The membership of the Osage Tribe presently numbers about 5,307 63 per¬
sons. Osage members are located in 295 communities in 35 different States.
The largest single group away from the State of Oklahoma is located in
southern California. Only 9 percent of the tribal members are full bloods.
Three-fourths of the tribal members are less than one-half Indian blood. A
continuing trend of biologic assimilation is apparently well established.” 64
This information was read into the record by Representative Harrison. In
1953, efforts were being made to terminate the Osages. It took the entire
Oklahoma delegation to Congress and the complete funding of the Osage
Agency by the Osages to prevent termination.

The Osage case is a landmark case for the argument against termination.
On the surface the people seem well assimilated and certainly accommo¬
dated, yet, the complications of tribal affairs make continued supervision
mandatory. The defense of the tribe by the council illustrates the sophisti¬
cation of the Osages more than the figures.

WHITE MAN’S PROBLEM
The Great Depression
Indians and the Depression

Most Americans who lived through the 1930s are aware of the effects of
economic depression on people, especially rural Americans. It was a difficult
time for white citizens and much worse than that for black Americans.
However, the Indian was hit the hardest. The Osages were fortunate in hav¬
ing a few dollars coming into the family from oil money. However, two
things should be noted: not all Osage families had this income; and those
few dollars kept all Osages from participation in government relief and re¬
covery programs.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 475

Purposes of the CCC-ID

After a great deal of effort, the Osages were allowed to participate in the
Indian Division of the Civilian Conservation Corps. Fortunately, this was
the most successful program applied to Indians during the New Deal. All
work was performed on restricted Osage lands. I worked on a crew where
no mechanical help was allowed. Rock was quarried without explosive or
mechanical aids, then loaded in wagons by hand and carried to the con¬
struction site by teams of horses or mules.

Three types of erosion control dams were built. Apron dams were built
on open flow ways; wall dams were built in gullies that were then plowed
full of soil again; and filter dams were built in open downcutting gullies.
Sheet erosion in tilled fields was checked by terraces.

Standard pay was thirty-five cents an hour with a maximum of forty
hours a week allowed. Two dollars and eighty cents a day does not seem like
much money by the standards of today, but it was riches beyond imagina¬
tion in a time when farm and ranch labor only received one dollar a day for
a ten-hour day.

Shelterbelts were also set out by the CCC-ID but my group was in the
Cross Timbers area and did not plant shelterbelts. Another CCC-ID project
was the range program, which was done by a crew different from mine. My
groups contribution to the range program was the construction of filter
dams on range lands. 65

Settlement of Claims
The Claims Commission

In the post-World War II era, efforts were made to clear up old governmen¬
tal business and to make a new start with a clean slate. Without a doubt, the
matter of Indian claims was not only one of the oldest persistent problems
but one that continued to goad the American sense of fair play. With these
factors as the motivation, the United States created the Indian Claims Com¬
mission in 1946. “This was a quasi-judicial branch of Congress created . . .
to deal finally with the longstanding claims of Native Americans against the
Federal Government.” 66

Acknowledgement of these claims was a clear recognition of Indian sov¬
ereignty. The Indian Claims Commission gave notice to Indian land, water,
and mineral rights. Furthermore, it asserted the rights of Indians to be dif¬
ferent and to live apart if they wished.

Osage Claims and Settlement

The first Osage claim filed with the Commission was docket number 9,
which was filed July 16, 1947. $3,480,627 was claimed and the award was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

476 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

set at $864,107.55 on March 1,1955. Docket numbers 105,106,107, and 108
were filed on May 14, 1951. Two additional claims were filed June 20, 1951
and were assigned document numbers 126 and 127. 67 These were claims
arising from associations with the United States. Namely, they were the
Treaties of 1808, 1815, 1819, 1823, 1825, 1839, 1865 and costs arising from
the unratified Drum Creek Treaty of 1868. Arguing that the Commission’s
awards were too generous, the Justice Department threatened to tie the
awards up with counter offset suits (that is, claims of the government against
the Osages). Along with this threat was a compromise offer of $13,250,000.
The Osages were required to either accept this compromise offer or face a
long, drawn-out legal battle with the Justice Department.

Basically, this money award was based on docket numbers 105, 106, 107,
and 108, 68 The decision to either accept or reject the compromise offer of
$13,250,000 was submitted to a vote of headright owners in a letter of
March 28, 1970. This letter included a fair and detailed summary of the
situation to be voted upon. Also included was a ballot with the question,
“Shall the qualified electors of the Osage Tribe of Indians as defined by the
Act of June 28,1906 (34 Stat. 539), and Title 25—Indians, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 73, accept a proposed settlement of $13,250,000 in full
payment of the Osage Claims, Dockets 105, 106, 107, and 108?”

The following comments are offered in fairness to those Osages who do
not have headrights: Possibly, you have wondered why you did not share in
the claims settlement since it was not money derived from the mineral es¬
tate. In theory, at least, being a descendant of either the Big or Little Osage
people should have entitled you to an equal share in the award. However,
you have no vote or recognition as an Osage citizen. You should know that
the minerals council sought to obtain special legislation as early as 1969 to
limit distribution of any awards to headright holders. This proposal was in¬
troduced by Mr. Edmondson on November 18, 1969. Although this was
proposed in 1969, it seems that it was not enacted into law until early
in 1971. The Act provided that only headright owners could share in any
awards arising from any claims. Thus, it adds income to the tribe from
sources other than mineral to the present mineral trust income of headright
holders. It is a blight on the honor of the United States of America to allow
and even to conspire to deprive Osage descendants of what is justly theirs.
Not only does the United States deprive the majority of the Osage of their
monetary inheritance, but it also deprives them of self-government by re¬
fusing to recognize any Osage government except the minerals govern¬
ment.

A million dollars was set aside to establish a tribal education fund. At
least Congress had the grace to provide some benefit for young Osages from

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 477

their heritage. Attorney fees of $1,300,442 were also paid from the award
money. Thus ended the Osage claims cases placed before the Federal Indian
Claims Commission.

The Threat of Termination
Introduction

There are those who viewed the termination efforts of the 1950s either as
a consensus of ignorance or a conspiracy of Congress to get out of the
responsibilities associated with Indians. While there is more than a little
truth in such beliefs, the actual causes are not so clear. Surely, the failure of
the New Deal Indian programs must be included in the causes. 69 Another
cause was the failure of the Claims Commission to settle for all time the
matter of Indian claims. For these and any number of undetermined rea¬
sons, Congress had reached a point where it felt the Indian would be better
off without federal supervision.

No matter how one views the termination spasm, one fact stands out:
Neither the Reformers nor those who favored termination had abandoned
the practice of deciding what was best for the Indians in general and then
trying to impose their ideas upon all Indians alike. Essentially, there are
three flaws in this practice that guarantee the failure of such programs and
policies. These are: (1) The ideas were not Indian ideas, nor did they include
any significant Indian input; (2) Enforcement and implementation was not
Indian-led; and (3) No universal program or policy for all Indians can work,
because Indians differ so greatly.

While the Osages were effectively arguing against termination, the two
Klamath delegates that were present had a firm mandate from the Klamath
people to fight in favor of termination. The Osage arguments convinced the
junior Klamath delegate (Boyd Jackson) that termination was a bad thing
and, to the disgust of the senior delegate (Wade Crawford), his associate
switched his stand and argued against termination. 7 "

As the matter turned out, H. Con. Res. 108 was enacted into law with
the Osage tribe omitted from the termination provision. The Klamath was
terminated according to the mandate of the Klamath people. Their lands
were sold and each Klamath received $40,000 as their share. A few years
later many were on relief. “As one member of the tribe said, ‘My grandchil¬
dren won’t have anything, not even the right to call themselves Indian.’ ” 71

Osage Termination

Through the excellent efforts of the council and especially of George V
Labadie, the Osages were able to convince Congress not to terminate them.
Eleven very concrete reasons were given to show why the Osages should

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

478 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

not be terminated. Most of these were associated with the mineral trust. It
was the foresight of these reasons that is so noticeable. For example: “Any
change from the tribes present status could lead to corruption and dissipate
the vast natural reserves owned by the Osage Indians.” One can appreciate
with gratitude the foresight of this statement in light of what happened to
the Klamath forest reserves after termination.

Quite probably, the first reason given was the most compelling reason to
continue federal supervision: “The Osage Tribe is self-sustaining and will
pay all expenses for Federal supervision during the continuance of the min¬
eral period.” 72 In relation to this particular argument against termination,
the testimony of Senator Mike Monroney is revealing.

senator monroney: My dear sir, there has been that ratification and
there has been that protection of the best scientists and administrators
that the Government can have.

MR. engle: How much has that cost the taxpayers of the Nation for
this?

senator monroney: I will say to the gentleman that out of the
$300,000 a year which is a cost to run this the tribe itself pays
$260,000 out of tribal funds. If it is necessary and the Government is
so anxious to relieve itself of any burden, the Osage Tribe, although
they pay many times that much in taxes on their lands and properties,

I am sure probably pay more. I am sure you could get these conscien¬
tious members of the tribe to pay the other $40,000.

MR. harrison: Would the Senator yield? Did I understand you to mean
that the tribe is willing to pay all of the costs of the tribal operation?
senator monroney: That is my understanding of the conversation with
tribal members. It can be brought out when they are on the stand.

MR. harrison: That not only means the $40,000 additional, when you
talk about the $300,000 cost and the $260,000 that the tribe pays for
operation; but it means they will also pay the cost of supervision and
review from the area and Washington offices of the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, the Office of Audit, and Inspection by the General Accounting
Office, and the costs involved in reviewing Osage tribal budgets and
the appropriation of tribal funds and also the cost of the liaison staff
and the cost of local hospitals and everything? I understand you to say
the Osages are willing to pay all of those costs?
senator monroney: I do not know about these intangible costs. They
are part of the United States. Maybe the gentleman would like to have
them pay the cost of the Internal Revenue Office, because they have

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 479

to collect taxes from them, and other things. But, I do not believe that
is the policy of Congress. 73

From the extreme interest shown by the committee in Senator Mon-
roney s testimony, at least one motive for termination of Indians seems evi¬
dent. The cost of administering Indian Affairs is expensive. Certainly, some
members of Congress in the 1950s and some today would like to renege on
the earlier treaties made in order to justify taking Indian lands. Possibly,
Congress was like Benjamin Franklin, who as a lad paid too much for a
whistle. However, the deal was struck and the debt must be paid. Alterna¬
tives, such as termination of the Klamaths, are not cheaper than maintaining
Indian supervision. It would be interesting to make a study of how much
tax money is now being spent to educate, house, feed, clothe, and furnish
health care to terminated Indians. Gambling odds would favor the cost be¬
ing much higher than using the previous agency system.

THE PRESENT AND WHAT IS YET TO COME
Indian Population
Population at Contact

Contrary to most population estimates of the American Indian in 1490,
demographic studies have placed the total population in the Americas of
1490 at 100,000,000. Mexico alone had a population of 30,000,000. The
United States and Canada had a combined population of 10,000,000. This
is about ten times the usual estimates of Indian population at the time
of contact in the United States. Efforts to disguise the terrible mortality
brought by Europeans and to justify the unused, savage lands argument ac¬
count for the consistent underestimates. 74

One can hardly maintain the stereotype of uncivilized savages in the
face of the actual population figures. As a matter of numerical fact, there
were more Indians than Europeans. Indian nutrition was better than that of
Europe, thanks to Indian agriculture. Generally, Indians were healthier than
Europeans, if for no other reason than the absence of the epidemic diseases
that afflicted Europe. These diseases were bred in the accumulated foulness
so common in Western civilization. The Indian lived in more sanitary vil¬
lages and cities.

It would be a surprise for most Americans to discover that the island of
Hispaniola (Haiti and Santo Domingo) had a population of from seven to
eight million. This is a larger population than the combined population of
Europe’s ten largest cities in 1500. How dismal the unused land argument or

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

480 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

the greatest good argument is in the face of such populations! This, in turn,
throws the justification for taking Indian lands “out the window.” There was
not then, nor is there now, any justification for taking Indian land except
plain outright greed and theft.

Population Today

The term “vanishing American” was never valid outside its special context.
It is true that Indians were vanishing from east of the Mississippi in the
1830s and 1840s. However, they were not a dying race as was believed at this
time of reforms (1830s and 1840s). Eastern Indians were removed to re¬
serves west of the Mississippi. While many Indian nations, such as the
Osages, were severely decimated, they eventually recovered.

We have ample evidence that Indians are still here and exhibiting great
vigor. As a matter of fact, Indian populations are increasing more rapidly
than the general population. BIA population reports clearly show an increase
in Indian population.

A 20 percent increase had been reported from the 1940 to the 1950
Census, another increase of over 40 percent for the i960 Census, and
still another 50 percent increase for the decade from i960 to 1970.
New methods of identification and of gathering Census data, and re¬
cently a new pride in Indianness are given as partial explanation for
these tremendous leaps foreword [sic forward]. Whatever the reason, the
preliminary 1970 count for Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos stood at
827,091 compared to 551,669 for the i960 count.

Almost half of the Native Americans now live in five States: Okla¬
homa, Indian population, 97,731; Arizona, 95,812; California, 91,018;
New Mexico, 72,788; and Alaska, 51,528; for a combined total of
408,877. 75

The U.S. Census Bureau publishes a report of American Indian and
Alaska Native Population. The report for 2000 gives the Osage population
as 15,897. More recent estimates (June 2002) place the Osage population at
slightly over 18,000.

Trends

Introduction

One fact about Indians has stood the test of time and badly formulated
policy. That one unchanging fact is the diversity of the Indian groups. This
diversity has been one of the consistent factors behind the failure of policy
after policy.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 481

As in most human problems, there are paradoxes—seeming contradic¬
tions. The relationship between the Indian and the BIA is one of the con¬
tradictions. By all measures of causes of human attitudes, the Indian should
detest the BIA and wish to free himself from its clutches. Yet, many Indian
groups fight desperately to remain under the BIA.

Surely, the BIA has badly mismanaged Indian estates. Yet, at the same
time it has salvaged some Indian estate from the ravages of greed. From an
Indian view, without the BIA there would be no estate to mismanage. At the
least, with the BIA the Indian still has something of economic value. More
than the economic factor, the BIA, by extending recognition to an Indian
people, places them in a special position in the American society—they are
Indian.

A healthy trend within the Indian culture is the rise of well-educated
Indians. They are bringing Indian ideas to bear upon policy making. Possi¬
bly, this will give a ring of validity to Indian policy. In time, it is possible
that the common denominators of the diverse Indian groups can be iden¬
tified and, thus, a valid general Indian history can be written.

Another desirable trend is a movement away from policies formed for the
benefit of the majority culture. Removal, allotment, and termination were
deceptions of reform that benefited the majority at the expense of the In¬
dian. Hopefully, a greater sincerity is woven into the fabric of todays Indian
policy. It is in the best interest of Indians and the American nation to make
it possible for Indians to contribute effectively to the nation s welfare.

Other trends suggest that Indians are again on “the move.” It is somewhat
of a shock to us to discover that the majority are seeking answers in the
Indian culture. Such was the case with three thousand theologians who in
1972 said the American Indian religion “provided in its concept of the
wholeness of man with nature a forgotten key to a viable theology for mod-

”76

ern man.

The growing tendency for Indian nations to publish newspapers reflect¬
ing their interests is a sign of the growing vitality of Indians. This has been
of special importance to the urban Indian since it provides a touch with the
people at “home.” Other trends are: the application of Indian designs and
clothing to modern styles; the increase in self determinism; and the increase
of Indian political action.

Passing of the Land

No factor in Indian life is more significant than the land in which it was
rooted. Now it is increasingly evident that most Indians are either landless
or they soon will be. This presents an extraordinary challenge to adapt In¬
dian ways to a landless existence. The implication of landlessness is espe-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

482 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

dally important to Indians. There is one immutable law operating against
the progressive expansion of Western civilization—there is no more land
than what exists now. There is no prospect of creating or discovering any
more new lands here on earth. For this reason, owners of land will experi¬
ence a growth in power and importance in the years ahead. Make no mis¬
take about this—land and power always go together when the people-to-
land ratio increases.

In any Indian land discussion, the claims settlement must be considered.
First, the Claims Commission was not a great success in settling claims dis¬
putes. Some Indians refused to accept money, for this would have left them
no land to claim. Most Indians dislike the adversary nature of the American
legal process. Thus, the Claims Commission left a “bad taste.” Possibly, the
Claims Commission’s best contribution will prove to be the idea of a forum
to settle differences.

The Modern Indian

While the modern Indian is so recent that we cannot comment extensively
on his characteristics, possibly a few are evident even at this early date. The
modern Indian has one trait in common: they have accommodated them¬
selves to the majority culture. That is, they have adapted themselves to live,
work, and compete in the white mans world while at the same time re¬
maining Indian. To put it succinctly, the modern Indian successfully stands
in two worlds.

There can be little doubt that a new group of Indian leaders are appear¬
ing. For the most part, they are well educated and not inclined to be “put
off,” as was commonly practiced with the older leaders. Associated with
these new leaders is the “red progressive” movement. Possibly, World War II
was responsible for turning the trend in Indian leadership.

Odd as it may seem, the movement of Indians from the rural reservations
to the urban areas has created a trend toward a stronger Indian identity. In
some respects, this has lessened the tribal associations and increased the gen¬
eral Indian association. However, the urbanization of Indians has lessened
the publics view of them as “real Indians.” Only recently has the urban
Indian come to be considered to be more than transitional.

The greatest worry of an urban Indian is the possible loss of their rights
to tribal membership and their Indian-ness. This is certainly true of urban
Osages who treasure their Osage heritage. “Back home” movements com¬
monly require physical presence for membership and participation. “Urban
life presented a new environment, with new problems but also new solu¬
tions. As Indians residing away from reservations, urban Indians risked losing
their ethnic identity. Legally, they risked being removed from tribal rolls,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 483

and emotionally, they risked losing the security and fellowship of their
communities.” 77

The mixed-bloods represent a long-standing problem. Merged with this
problem is where to draw the line between Indian and white blood, that is,
where to draw the blood quantum line, or should there be a blood quantum
cutoff line? It is a vitally important question for both a tribe and the mixed-
bloods who have always identified with the tribe. It is a psychological factor
with the individual and the economic factor of a growing roll for the
tribe. 78

Indian education is hampered by low income and remoteness from facili¬
ties. Most Indians have been “sent away” from home for a part of their ele¬
mentary or secondary education. As expected, no educational system exists
that is tailored for Indians in general, and even those schools dealing with
only one group are far afield from Indian needs. Most of all, we include the
BIA schools in this indictment. Of all schools in the nation, these should be
most responsive to Indian needs.

A tender spot among any group of Indians is the textbooks their children
are forced to use. There is not one textbook in American history that gives
a fair and unbiased account of the American Indian. We are not speaking
here of ignoring the Indian’s role in making this a great nation, but, instead
we are referring to the outright bias and misrepresentation. Typically, when
studying about the frontier, the brave pioneers faced the wilderness and the
savage Indian. Indians have no problem with the Europeans puffing up their
egos with self praise, but we do object to their self worship at the expense
of the Indian.

The Osage Museum

Archaeology in the United States is primarily based on Indians. Americas
only claim to antiquity is the Indian past. A growing body of information
seems to indicate the possibility that the first homo sapiens sapiens or Cro-
Magnon Man quite possibly originated in the Americas (although I do not
agree with this idea). Since Cro-Magnon Man is currently held to be mod¬
ern man, the implications are indeed interesting. Around thirty to thirty-
five thousand years ago, the ancestral Indian quite possibly crossed the “land
bridge” to the Old World. It is increasingly likely that the first Indians ap¬
peared in Europe as Cro-Magnon Man and replaced Neanderthal Man. If
this proves to be true, all mankind originated with the American Indian.
Thus, the indications discovered by American archaeology could be a revo¬
lution in human origin theory. All theories notwithstanding, Indians are
still the oldest identifiable race on the face of the earth.

If for no other reason, this fact is enough to justify protection of archaeo-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

484 / Indian Influences and the Modern Indian

logical sites and the establishment of Indian museums. The modern trend
toward the establishment and operation of tribal museums started in 1934.
John Joseph Mathews, a mixed-blood Osage, was the guiding force behind
the first tribal museum, which was the Osage tribal museum established on
the Osage Agency Campus at Pawhuska, Oklahoma. The museum started
with the John Bird collection and mostly borrowed items from the Osage
people; it now owns several outstanding collections. The first curator of the
museum was Miss Lillian Mathews, sister to John Joseph. Under the leader¬
ship of the late Maud Blackbird Cheshewalla, 79 curator, the museum held
classes in Osage Arts and Crafts. Currently, Catherine Red Corn is the cu¬
rator.

Opening as it did in 1938, the museum faced some trying times. World
War II brought gasoline shortages and many Osages advocated closing the
museum as an unnecessary expense. Yet, the museum survived and led the
way for other tribes to preserve their heritage. It was reported in a congres¬
sional report in 1943 that “The guest register (from July 1,1942 to June 30,
1943) was signed by 2,994 persons, the names of which represented resi¬
dents of every State in the Union, Austria, Wales, and England.” 8 "

Tomorrow
The Present Crisis

Like all other peoples of the United States and Western civilization, Indians
are standing at the crossroads of today and tomorrow. Yesterdays past four
hundred years were years of unprecedented expansion for Western civiliza¬
tion. They were years that saw the all but total destruction of Indian civili¬
zation. However, today the Indian feels the currents of change in the air and
earth. Being carried in the current of Western civilization in which they are
trapped, Indians may still leave an even firmer imprint on the direction of
Western civilization than they did in the past four centuries. Western men
and Indians alike are seeking and probing for a new life in a world without
the great frontier areas of yesterday.

Possibilities

It is possible that tribal identities and a corporate governmental form, such
as the Osages now have, will become a pattern of the future. Surely, business
structures seem to continue the corporate pattern. It seems likely that land
ownership will tend to the corporate ownership idea in the next century.
This is much closer to the Indian idea of land ownership than the Euro-
American concept brought to these shores. It does not seem very probable
that this corporate land ownership will assume the stewardship role that

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Indian Influences and the Modern Indian / 485

prevailed in the Indian pattern. Unfortunately, Western civilization seems
to be set in a pattern of exploiting the earth instead of protecting it.

No matter what direction and solutions emerge in the twenty-first cen¬
tury, the past will be viewed wistfully, with a profound sense of loss. The
Indian will become dearer to the American people. His art, morals, and phi¬
losophy will be sought and treasured.

Two great Indian concepts may receive a considerable amount of exami¬
nation. One of these is the absence of greed for material things. A greed-
motivated society cannot prevail in the face of ever-increasing shortages of
raw materials. Secondly, the Indian view of unity and harmony, such as the
Osage concept of the unity of sky and earth, must be given serious consid¬
eration. Western man cannot continue to strip the earth and poison the at¬
mosphere.

If ever mortal humans needed to be alone in a natural setting for a time
of reflection, modern humans are prime candidates. Hopefully, humans will
not destroy all of the natural environment, its plants, its animals, and its
wonders. Without this, they will become less than human, for humans are of
the earth. To become lost in an artificial manmade environment is to be¬
come as artificial as the world we create and move about in. Humans must
learn to walk in harmony with the earth or cease being human.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue

SURVIVAL FACTORS
Nature of Change
Abrupt Changes

Change is a constant threat to survival. Abrupt changes such as floods, earth
tremors, volcanic eruptions, and tornadoes leave no time for adjustment.
While survival from these abrupt changes depends upon skill to a limited
extent, survival under these conditions is more a matter of chance than it is
of skill. Our story of the Osages shows very few examples of the abrupt
type of change. Possibly, the advent of the horse is the best example of an
abrupt change in Osage history, or possibly the legendary sudden flood.

Osages adapted to the horse with an ease that revealed an understanding
of the uses of the horse. Possibly, it was the horse that led the Osages to the
southwest across the Plains in a remarkable conquest. The coming of horses
to the Osages is an example of a constructive change as opposed to a de¬
structive change. The cultural adjustments were immediate—less than a
generation. However, it should be noted that the Osages rarely used the
horse in warfare. They preferred to fight on foot even on the Plains.

Gradual Change

It is the gradual change that is the most difficult to cope with. The devices
created to live with these changes are called “culture.” As time passes, people
learn to identify the usual and mainly predictable changes even though they
are gradual. However, the American Indian generally, and the Osages spe¬
cifically, experienced a type of change unique in human experience. Their
contact with a completely alien culture and the manner in which alien ways
were imposed upon them were unique. Indian experiences with the Euro-
American stand as the only such event in the totality of human knowledge.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue / 487

While some small localized areas may have had a similar experience, noth¬
ing like the American experience had happened before. For this reason
alone, it should be well understood for the good of all humanity.

The sign that a change was taking place was first seen in the adjustments
in the survival base. (A survival base is the means used to supply the basic
needs, such as food, clothing, and shelter.) Possibly, the Osages were aware
that their survival was endangered at this point in the change process. They
accepted the horse, the gun, the steel knife, and the hand axe as an improve¬
ment over their traditional tools used to provide food, clothing, and shelter.
These and other trade items gradually changed the Osage culture from self
sufficiency to a culture dependent on trade. Therefore, the basic survival in¬
stitutions of the culture were altered to cope with the new dependency.

Some adjustments in their religious activities were necessary since reli¬
gion was an integral part of their survival institutions, such as the hunt,
gathering, and tillage. Possibly the most difficult adjustment was the neces¬
sary apology to the “little brothers” for killing them and trading their pelts
for the new “necessities.” Although they hunted the “little brothers” nearly
to extinction, we doubt that a full justification was ever reached in Osage
minds. The old religion has long since been abandoned, but many of its
features exist in the Osage practice of Christianity. The “little brothers” are
still honored in Osage ceremonies.

Changes in the Osage government were noticeable all through the his¬
toric period. The central government, which was based upon the gentile
system, was characterized by two Grand Division Chiefs and the Society of
Little Old Men. At the local level, the bands were led by minor leaders who
held their positions by mutual consent of the people in the band.

The Grand Earth Division Chief was the first part of this government
to fade away from the Euro-American records. The position was still a func¬
tioning part of Osage government, but the position was not mentioned in
the chronicles. An identical fate was delegated to the Society of the Little
Old Men. They existed as a potent power among the Osage people to 1870,
but they were all but unknown to Euro-Americans until after their power
was gone. Band leaders were the last to go, and they were the last to be
chosen by traditional Osage practice.

To bring the Osages into conformity with Euro-American wishes, their
institutions had to be replaced by Western versions of what they should be.
At first, this was done by recognizing cooperative Osage leaders and snub¬
bing those who did not cooperate. This practice weakened the gentile sys¬
tem, broke the power of the Little Old Men, and destroyed the common
bond of Osage unity. By 1869, the Osage government had been weakened

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

488 / Epilogue

enough so that Euro-Americans could create an Osage government to fit
the white man’s needs and desires.

Margin of Survival
Zenith

Of the four stages of Osage survival, the zenith or peak in the margin of
survival came early in the Contact period. Although the actual rise of Osage
power predates 1750, we set this year as the beginning of a time when the
Osages enjoyed a maximum margin of survival. This period lasted through
the fifty years between 1750 and 1800. However, throughout the French and
Spanish periods, the Osages experienced a great surge in survival capability.
Through conquest, they were adding a greater variety of climates to their
territory, and with this came a greater variety of useful plants and animals.

These plus the greater variety of minerals that became available provided
security in nutrition, shelter, and manufacture of tools. Their hunting and
trapping area was significantly increased and, thus, they had an increase in
the all important raw material of the fur trade. These factors materially in¬
creased their margin of survival. More than this, their conquests honed their
skills in diplomacy and war, and they thus became a potent force in mid-
America.

Faced with both Indian and Euro-American foes, the Osages stood firmly
entrenched in the Ozarks. Although the Osages faced more enemies at one
time than any other Indian nation, they held firm to their lands. No avail¬
able military force of Indian or Euro-American origin could dislodge the
Osages from their position of preeminence. Again, they were secure from an
attack of annihilation and thus had a wide margin of survival. Yet, their
defenses from within were vulnerable and open to attack. All Indians suf¬
fered from one form or another of an inner vulnerability.

Decline

It was the inner vulnerability inherent in the Osage culture that brought a
decline in the margin of survival. The white man had a greed for material
gain; the Osage had a greed for what is loosely interpreted as honors. More
accurately, this was a thirst for recognition and appreciation of one’s deeds
and good will to all men. Between 1800 and 1852, the Osages allowed their
greed for honors to override their innate caution.

By 1852, the Osages were weakened in spirit and in body. Their country
was occupied by intruders who had been welcomed at first, as Osage culture
dictated. Dilution of their culture had taken place and, although it was far
from a saturation of Western culture, it had passed a point of no return.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue / 489
Nadir

The nadir or low point of the Osage margin of survival was reached be¬
tween 1852 and 1885. Weakened by a cultural invasion with a consequent
loss of spirit and health, the Osages were a target for disaster. Without mercy,
successive epidemics of Old World diseases struck the Osages. Reeling from
the impact of this blow, the Osages were struck by first the sectional strife
in Kansas and then the plague of the American Civil War.

Decimated by causes not of their making, and sick with the “white man
disease,” yet another calamity fell upon the tattered remnants of the once
great Osage people. Greed-driven intruders demanded the ouster of these
few survivors from their lands because the intruders wanted them. Sick of
the white man and wishing to be once again alone, the Osages bought a
reserve in Indian Territory that was “plow proof.” At this point, the Osage
margin of survival was a thin, ragged, fragile thread.

Resurrection

By 1885, money from the sale of Kansas lands was easing the crushing re¬
sults of the “four horsemen” riding among the Osages. Added to this was
the growing income from grass leases. Wall kon ta had punished his people,
but he had not abandoned them. Rapid adaptations were being made within
the remains of the Osage culture. By 1906, the Osages were ready to step
into the twentieth century. Their spirit was restored, their health was im¬
proving, and they now possessed the white mans power—money.

Possibly some Osages were money-foolish but they were not money-
driven like the white men who swarmed to the money. Like vultures de¬
scending on prized carrion, the white men descended on the living remains
of the Osage people. Oil brought riches to the Osages and a contradiction
in power. It gave the Osages a growing margin of survival through tribal
power in the halls of Congress, but it brought a restriction of personal
power in the halls of the county courts. The Osages fought through legal
battles, murders, threats to the mineral estate, and termination. Their margin
of survival is now secure again, but only as a diluted people of mixed-
bloods as they stand at the edge of another new century.

Recognition of Change
Contact

Unlike Indians of the coastal areas, the Osages felt the effects of Euro-
Americans before they actually made contact with them. It is probable that
the Osages might have observed segments of the Coronado party without
making any contact. Surely, they had horses before the recorded contacts.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

490 / Epilogue

They also had eye witness accounts as well as indirect information about the
white men. Being aware of the white man before contact gave the Osages
an advantage when the contact was made, for they were neither awed nor
surprised.

Yet, the Osages remained unaware that even before they met Euro-
Americans, the changes brought by the meeting of two alien cultures were
already at work among them. Both the horses and stories they heard placed
the forces of change in motion. Changes related to the horse were rapid and
evident. However, changes in thinking due to the stories preceding the pres¬
ence of Euro-Americans were subtle and difficult to detect.

Probably, the most direct evidence of the effect on Osage thinking was
the less than enthusiastic reception given to the earliest contacts. Sometimes,
the customary friendliness of the Osages was replaced by cautious courtesy,
but usually they displayed a firm determination not to allow passage to the
west. This strongly indicates a preplanned reception based on prior informa¬
tion. It is both possible and probable that the Osage “aloofness” trait evolved
in this early contact period. Aloofness is the best single-word description of
the Osage approach to contact with the white man.

Evidence of Change

For most of the people on both sides who were involved in the contact of
cultures, change was far from their level of awareness. It seems likely that
other Indians had experiences similar to the Osage experience. The inci¬
dence of disagreement among the Osage after contact increased rapidly.
Unanimity of action had always been the Osage practice. If this universal
approval of an action was not obtained, no action was taken. After contact,
there were few Osage actions that had the universal approval of the Osage
people. As the bicultural contact grew, disagreements increased. Therefore,
the size of action groups decreased, since it was impossible to get unanimous
approval for a larger action group.

This became a first characteristic of change among the Osage. A static
culture has few disagreements. Likewise, a united culture undergoing rapid
changes has few disagreements. It is a third condition that brings disagree¬
ment. A disunified culture experiencing rapid changes is certain to have
many disagreements. Acting under this third condition, the Osages became
fragmented. The problem of disagreement probably arose from the varied
strangeness of an alien culture. One must realize that, where Western civi¬
lization was concerned, the Osages had no experience to base their thinking
upon. Therefore, their opinions varied greatly, which made unanimous re¬
sponse impossible.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue / 491

The Euro-American had an advantage here, since they were accustomed
to meeting somewhat alien cultures and, therefore, had some experience to
guide them. However, while the fact has not been stressed, the preceding
chapters show quite clearly that Euro-Americans were also feeling their
way in a new situation. In addition, they were accustomed to action ordered
by arbitrary decisions of their leaders; they were not yet acquainted with the
democratic practice of actions based upon mutual agreement of all the people
or at least a majority.

A second characteristic of change among the Osage was the shifting
structure and powers of their government. While the powers common to
all the Osages resided within the Society of Little Old Men, their powers
were so eroded that on the eve of Osage removal from Kansas only the
power of respect remained. Thus, the power of the unifying clan system was
replaced by a rise in the power of the local band leaders. This too was a trend
of disunity symptomatic of the changes wrought by the meeting of the two
cultures.

The most telling characteristic of change was in the Osage diet. Without
a doubt, the Osage were well aware of the changes taking place by the late
Spanish period or 1790s. This deeply affected their shift in policy toward
Euro-Americans in the early-1800s, which coincided with the coming of
the Americans. The decision to cooperate was far from unanimous, but gen¬
erally, no large-scale violent opposition to Euro-Americans was ever taken
by the Osages after 1800.

This lack of opposition resulted in a curtailed diet brought on by land
cessions, which consistently shrunk the food base availability. More severe
limitations were imposed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the subsequent
Civil War. Further dietary constrictions grew from land-hungry Indian hat¬
ers who seized the Osage cornfields and hampered their hunts.

The effect of change among the Osages was terrible because the few
beneficial changes were overwhelmed by destructive changes. Almost every
destructive force imaginable was turned against the Osage people. Yet they
survived still intact as a distinct people. We doubt that Western civilization
could do as well if the same forces were to strike it for the next four hun¬
dred years.

Despair

It would be difficult to argue effectively that despair overtook the Osage
people in the 1870s. Many survivors who later lived in the “lap of luxury,”
so to speak, looked back with wistfulness on the poverty and desperation of
the 1870s when compared to the unhappiness their wealth and life of ease

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

492 / Epilogue

brought them. In the midst of their crushing poverty and desperation, the
Osages still found happiness and not despair. This possibly contributed to
their survival.

Geographic Aspects
Climate

Climate had a varying role in the rise and fall of the Osage people. Their
expansion from the Missouri base added an increase in climates to the Osage
domain, which, in turn, gave a greater variety of useful plants to the people.
With the increase in food and industrial plants came a higher living standard
that enabled the Osages to become very large in person and powerful as a
people.

However, because of cultural aspects that made them vulnerable to West¬
ern men and the effects of cultural change, the Osages gradually lost their
climatic advantage. We have already noted the effects of this reduction in
area that reduced the climatic variety. Yet, the core climate of the Osage
homeland remained the same. We can only conclude, therefore, that what¬
ever changes were wrought among the Osages were not brought about be¬
cause of climate.

Cyclonic Storms

Like climate, the path of cyclonic storms has remained a constant in the
Osage homeland. The same physical and mental stimulation that launched
the Osages into an expansion from the Missouri Ozarks still exists in the
Osage Hills of Oklahoma today. So, we may not place the rise and fall of
the Osage people upon the doorstep of cyclonic storms.

Relative Location

While the Osages still reside within the bounds of their old domain, the
conditions of their relative location have been radically changed. That is,
they still reside within less than a hundred miles of their old villages in
almost identical terrain. Yet, the cultural and technological changes have
rendered their former advantage in relative location completely useless.
They are still a continental people with a continental culture, but even their
continental location advantage is lost amid automobiles, airplanes, and rail¬
roads.

Cultural Aspects
Cultural Exposure

Indian-to-Indian exposure was a common experience to the Osages. Their
central location in mid—America caused them to be surrounded by other

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue / 493

Indian groups. This, in itself, was not unusual, but their location on the Mid¬
dle Waters and at the transition of the short grass and woodland regions was
especially significant. Likewise, their location between the two great rivers
to the West—the Missouri and Arkansas Rivers—was of great importance.

The Indian cultures of the northeast and southeast differed between
themselves as well as from those to the southwest and northwest of the
Osages. Cultures to the north and south of the Osages also differed. While
other Indian nations were surrounded by other Indians, none were sur¬
rounded by such diversity of Indian cultures as the Osages.

It was this exposure to virtually all the North American continental In¬
dian cultures that helped make the Osages so unusual. They probably reflect
the broadest spectrum of continental Indian culture existent. In both pre¬
historic and historic times, the Osages were among the more cosmopolitan
of the Indian nations.

Such an extensive exposure to diverse cultures should have enabled the
Osages to easily adapt to the Euro-American culture. However, the Osages
had developed, to some degree, a cultural trait of Western civilization. West¬
ern civilizations outstanding trait is the ability to borrow selected parts of
other cultures and to adapt these parts to their own culture. This is not to
say that they throw their culture away and replace it with another culture.
It is to say that both Western civilization and the Osage civilization are
composed of cultural aspects that have been borrowed from many cultures.

This habit of selecting specific parts of other cultures tended to develop
a strong rejection of cultural aspects that were not desired. When the Euro¬
pean and Osage met there were cultural exchanges both ways. However,
there was also strong cultural rejection both ways. This same process was at
work in contact with other Indians. With the Osages the acceptance and
rejection of Euro-American cultural traits was probably stronger than with
other Indian groups and followed a slightly different course.

Western Civilization and Cultural Borrowing

Few Indian peoples accepted Euro-American cultural hardware as rapidly
or adapted it so well to their culture as did the Osage. Conversely, few In¬
dian cultures rejected Euro-American social institutions as firmly as the
Osage. It was this factor that made the Osage people such a strong example
of adaptation to both the Western world and the Indian world. In simple
terms, the Osage people stand firmly in two American worlds because of
their cultural borrowing and rejection trait.

The significance to this idea from Osage history is that the same trait
exists in the American majority culture in a more intensive form. In part,
this could explain why Americans have such terrible relationships with

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

494 / Epilogue

many non-Western nations. The “Ugly American” did not appear from no¬
where. He had roots in cultural borrowing and rejection practices. That is,
he feels that what he keeps is superior to what he rejects. This feeling of
superiority of one’s own “rubs fur the wrong way.”

Domestic Animals

Surely, the presence or absence of animals capable of domestication has
been of vital importance to the Osage. We have ample evidence that the
domestication of animals was not a new idea to Indians. The dog clearly
demonstrates the validity of this statement. Llamas, alpacas, vicunas, and
guinea pigs are further proofs. Modern efforts to domesticate the American
bison, deer, and bear show only a small success with great effort. In short,
other than the dog, it was not practical to domesticate the animals that were
available to the Osages.

This absence of animals capable of practical domestication was a decisive
factor in the development of Old World and New World civilizations. A
civilization based on the power of human muscle must find solutions that
differ from those based on power from animal muscle. Aside from the dif¬
ference in basic power source, the presence or absence of domestic animals
also affects the food supply. Supplying meat protein in the diet seems to be
a historic necessity. Possession of domesticated meat sources and the lack of
such a source require different solutions for survival. Thus, in these two
cultural aspects, power and food supply, domestic animals are a determining
factor.

However, the role of domestic animals goes far beyond these two obvious
factors. Everyday use of animal power generates a mind-set toward power
sources beyond the power of human muscle. This, in turn, directs the mind
to other power sources and applications. The two go together and reinforce
each other; that is, outside power and application is associated with animal
power and application. Without domestic animal power, the concept of us¬
ing any power other than that of humans would rely on accidental discov¬
ery. In this chain of discovery tied to the presence of domestic animals, the
Old World had an unequal advantage over the New World, which led to the
substitution of mechanical power for muscle power.

Yet, this factor was not all advantage, because this same idea has a bearing
on the widespread practice of human bondage. Some Indian groups had
used Western-style slavery in historic times. However, prehistoric Indians
never engaged in this form of slavery. Milder forms were present, but even
these forms were rare. The esne, serf, peon, and other land-bondage type of
slavery were unknown to prehistoric Indians. There were classes of laborers,
but they were not in bondage. Personal slavery or bondage of individuals

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Epilogue / 495

was also alien to Indians. Indentured servitude is as near to the form of
slavery practiced by some prehistoric Indians as one can find in Western
civilization.

It is possible that the sense of mastering nature so typical of Western
civilization also arises to some extent from possession of domestic animals.
In any event, the Indian either could not or did not have the inspiration to
either master nature or the animals around him. Among the Osages, the idea
of one human owning another was repulsive. If the Indian rejected these
traits of Western civilization, and he did, then we must turn to what took
their place in the Indian culture.

Western civilization tended to progress from possession of domestic ani¬
mals to mechanical power and its application. Such a course leads to a con¬
centration on the development of technology or cultural hardware. The
American Indian lacked domestic animals and, therefore, progressed upon a
different course of development. He devoted much of his time in observing
the world around him. From this, he evolved a concept of rhythm in the
world. The world was alive, not in the sense of animism but in the sense of
purpose. The Osage preoccupation with attaining old age differed from
merely growing old. One should reach old age by living in step with the
earth and all upon it. If this required one’s death, that was a part of living
and would continue to live through his or her descendants who did reach
old age. The value in life was the journey of life and the quality of the
journey. One can see that Osage thought was directed to living instead of
to technology. All else in Osage culture followed this line of thought, which
in its essence was to follow the natural pattern of life, not to conquer it.

Religion

Some aspects of Christianity are much like the old Osage religion. This
is especially true of those aspects of Christianity that survived the revi¬
sions imposed by Germanic influence. The self-righteous, stern, militant ap¬
proaches to religion were rejected immediately by the Osages. Hellfire and
brimstone held no terror for an Osage, since he had no concept of eternal
damnation. Kindness, gentleness, and understanding were religious concepts
easily accepted.

Stern, sober services or ceremonies were not acceptable to a people who
enjoyed living. Yet, symbolism and devout ceremonies were a part of their
life. There is little doubt that the Catholic Church, of all Christian churches,
appealed to the Osages. There were conflicts in doctrine between Catholi¬
cism and the Osages. The main conflict was in the marriage concepts. Osage
Mission records clearly show this. There are very few, in fact, almost no full-
blood marriages recorded by the Mission.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

496 / Epilogue

Among the thousands of baptisms recorded are hundreds of interment
records. It seems evident in the Mission records that the Osages firmly be¬
lieved in baptism. Why not? They had a ceremony that was almost identical
in their own religion. Burial was somewhat different. Some minor differ¬
ences, plus the absence of a priest, often caused the Christian interment to
be omitted. Today, the Church permits Osage burial practices within Catholic
interment.

The Catholic Church has shown an understanding of the Osages and has
accepted many Osage practices in the local parishes. In return, the Osages
have responded to the Church. The Pawhuska parish, for example, is eighty
percent Indian, the highest percentage of Indians in any Catholic parish.
While the Catholics and other denominations have adopted some Osage
ways, the American Indian Peyote Church in Osage County incorporates
an even higher percentage of the old Osage religion.

CONCLUSION

After all has been said, what remains is to state that the Osages have lived
through a severe challenge to their survival. If a prehistoric Osage were to
again trod upon the sand rock and move among the blackjacks, he would
hardly recognize the Osage Hills. Furthermore, he would not recognize a
modern Osage as a member of the Osage people any more than a modern
Osage would be able to recognize him as sharing the same blood. Neither
could converse with the other. They would represent two alien cultures
meeting again.

To believe that the Osages survived intact from their ordeal is a delusion
of the mind. What has been possible to salvage has been saved and is dearer
to our hearts because it survived. What is gone is treasured because it was
what we once were. We gather our past and present into the depths of our
being and face tomorrow. We are still Osage. We live and we reach old age
for our forefathers.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes

CHAPTER i

1. Chapman casts doubts on the Osage legends and Dorseys conclusions. He
argues the Osages could have migrated from the southwest. See W J. McGee, “The
Siouan Indians: A Preliminary Sketch,” 15th Annual Report, BAE, Smithsonian In¬
stitution (Washington: U.S. GPO, 1897), pp- 187-188, and Carl H. Chapman, The
Origin of the Osage Indian Tribe, (New York: Garland, 1974), p. 159.

2. John T. Terrell, American Indian Almanac (New York: World, 1971); also see
Terrell, Sioux Trail (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974).

3. Ibid.; also see Kenneth C. Carstens and Patty Jo Watson, Of Caves and Shell
Mounds (Tuscaloosa: Univ. of Alabama Press, 1996).

4. Ibid., pp. 89-90.

5. Burns, pp. 27-38; also see the subsection “Forming the Confederation” in
this chapter for discussion.

6. Alvin M.Josephy, The Indian Heritage of America (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1968), p. 103.

7. Ibid.

8. Louis F. Burns, Osage Indian Bands and Clans (Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga Press,
1984), pp. 29-42.

9. John Joseph Mathews, The Osages: Children of the Middle Waters (Norman:
Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1961), p. 128.

10. Gibson, pp. 31-34.

11. Josephy, Indian Heritage, pp. 103-104.

12. Gibson, pp. 31-34; Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 103.

13. Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 103.

14. Black Dog I always led his people out on the Plains at the first sign of an
epidemic. His idea was to avoid Osage population centers until the epidemic was
over.

15. Josephy, Indian Heritage, pp. 103-106.

16. Elmo Ingenthron, Indians of the Ozark Plateau (Point Lookout, Mo.: School
of the Ozarks Press, 1981), p. 56.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

498 / Notes

17. Chapman, Origin of the Osage, pp. 186-188; Brewton Berry, Carl Chapman,
and John Mack, “Archaeological Remains of the Osage,” American Antiquity, 10
(July 1944).

18. Preston Holder, The Hoe and the Horse on the Plains (Lincoln: Univ. of Ne¬
braska Press, 1970), pp. 74-76.

19. Houck, History of Missouri, p. 50.

20. Burns, Customs and Myths, p. 15.

21. The Red Eagle subclan of the Tsi shu Peacemaker clan led the Osage dawn
prayers. Its myths were never recorded. Hints of the contents of these prayers are in
Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Reports. See: 36th, p. 51; 39th, pp. 120-123;
and 45th, pp. 566-571.

22. William Brandon, Last Americans (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974), p. 52.

23. Heart Stays comes from the Osage flood legends. These were Osages who
survived the sudden flood by staying on small hummocks upon the flood plain.
Thus, those who stayed were called Heart Stays and always established their villages
on low ground near a river bench.

24. Phillip E. Chappell, “River Navigation: A History of the Missouri River,”
Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, 1905-1906, 9: 241.

25. T. C. Pease, ed., “French Foundations, 1680-1693,” Collections of the Illinois
State Historical Library, French Series, vol. 1, 23: 389-391.

26. Thomas Nuttall,H Journal of Travels into Arkansas Territory During the Year 1819,
ed. S. Lottenville (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1980), p. 28on.

27. Houck, History of Missouri, pp. 104-118.

28. Louis F. Burns, ed., Osage Mission Baptisms, Marriages, and Interments, 1820-
1886 (Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga Press, 1986).

29. Houck, History of Missouri.

30. Lawrence Kinnaird, ed., “Spain in the Mississippi Valley, 1765-1794,' ’’Annual
Report of the American Historical Association, 1943, vols. 2, 3, and 4.

31. In the Tsi shu version, these were red oak trees. In the Black Bear version,
they alit on seven boulders. A fragment tells us that the red bird (morning prayer
eagle or Red Eagle) gave the people bodies.

32. These and all other stories given in this chapter are from Burns, Customs and
Myths, unless otherwise footnoted.

33. The earliest Osage term for the horse was Shon ka Cee Tun ka or Big Yellow
Dog. A horse would certainly be an extraordinarily large dog. Under Spanish in¬
fluence, the Spanish word for horse, caballo, became Ka wa in Osage.

34. Even in these early times the Osages buried their dead. They kept their vil¬
lages clean; all waste was carried some distance from the village. In time, a midden
ring developed around the village, and the midden ring was called the outskirts of
the village. Cleansing rites for returning war parties were always conducted outside
this ring.

35. To distinguish between the old shrine of the Grand War Party, which re¬
mained in the village, and the new portable shrines, suffixes were added—that is, Wa
ho pe Tun ka and Wa ho pe Shin ka or Big Shrine and Little Shrine.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 499

36. Man of Mystery was thunder, the life symbol of the Ne ke Wa kon ta Ke or
Men of Mystery clan. This and the Lo ha or Buffalo Bull clan made up the Tsi ha
she. Lo ha is archaic Osage for Tsa To ka (Buffalo Bull).

37. This Osage expression meant “pay attention.” Much the same meaning is
contained in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “lend me your ears,” 3.2.79.

38. Owner or keeper in the Osage sense means that all new Little Shrines had
to be made under the direction of the Osages and payment had to be made to them.
Many individuals of other clans owned and kept Little Shrines in the European
sense of owner and keeper.

39. There were usually two Grand Buffalo Hunts a year. Going to and from the
hunts each year entailed over 1,200 miles of travel.

40. Flint forms as irregular masses of silica in limestone beds.

41. McGee, “Siouan Indians”; Chapman, Origin of the Osage.

CHAPTER 2

1. John Hodgdon Bradley, World Geography (Boston: Ginn, 1951), pp. 106, 125,
135; This reference is based on the Glenn T. Trewartha classifications.

2. Ellsworth Huntington, Principles of Human Geography (New Yorkjohn Wiley
and Sons, 1947), pp. 3-7.

3. Ellen Churchill Semple, “Geographical Location as a Factor in History,” An¬
nual Report of the American Historical Association for 190J, 1908, 1: 45; Full text in
Bulletin of the American Geographical Society ; 40: 1-17.

4. Roger Ward Babson was an economic statistician who predicted accurately
the 1929 economic crash. He founded Webber College and Babson Institute of
Business Administration. In addition, he wrote thirty-five books on economics and
other subjects.

5. Noel M. Loomis and Abraham P. Nasatir, Pedro Vial and the Roads to Santa Fe
(Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1967), p. 23ff, ioin.

6. Finger talk is the Osage name for what Euro-Americans call sign language.

7. This founding date is taken from a brochure published by the Ponca City,
Oklahoma, Cultural Center.

8. Arrell M. Gibson, The American Indian: Prehistory to the Present (Lexington,
Mass.: D. C. Heath, 1980), pp. 130-132.

9. Ibid.

10. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Vol. II: 125-126, 133.

11. George A. Custer, My Life on the Plains, ed. M. M. Quaife (Chicago: Lakeside
Press, 1952), pp. 321-352.

12. Charles De Montesquieu, “The Spirit of Laws,” ed. R. M. Hutchins, Great
Books of the Western World, vol. 38 (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952), pp. ix-x,
3, 18, 12411, 127-128.

13. The foregoing discussion is based on Burns, Indian Bands and Customs and
Myths

14. Burns, loc. cit.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

500 / Notes

15. The Osage had two years in each Euro-American year. Fall and Winter were
called Winter Year while Spring and Summer were called Summer Year. Thus, the
fall hunt was sometimes called the winter hunt and the spring hunt was sometimes
called the summer hunt.

16. The Oneota aspect was strongly represented between the Des Moines River
and Missouri River mouths. South of the Ohio, however, it was all but nonexistent.

17. Ingenthron, Indians of the Ozark Plateau, p. 63.

18. Ibid., pp. 59-60.

19. Waldo R. Wedel, An Introduction to Kansas Archeology ; Bureau of American
Ethnology, Bulletin 174, Smithsonian Institution, 1959, p. 56.

20. Black Dog I became a band chief about 1785. His father had moved the band
to Baxter Springs, Kansas, some years before his death and while Black Dog I was
still a young boy.

21. Col. Wallace Talbot of Gravois Mills, Missouri, has verbally assured us that
he found this village on a map held by the Missouri State Library at Jefferson City.
It is also shown on a map at Fort Osage.

22. M. F. Ashley Montagu, “An Indian Tradition Relating to the Mastodon,”
American Anthropologist, 46 (October-December 1944): 568-591.

23. Waldo R. Wedel, “Prehistory and the Missouri Valley Development Pro¬
gram,” Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 3: 40, 1948.

24. Ibid.

25. John R. Swanton, The Indian Tribes of North America, Bureau of American
Ethnology, Bulletin 145, 1952,^271.

26. This Grand River is a tributary to the Osage River, and it should not be
confused with the Grand River that comes into the bend of the Missouri River
from the north.

27. Houck, History of Missouri, pp. 225-226.

28. Brewton Berry and Carl Chapman, “An Oneota Site in Missouri,” American
Antiquity, 7 (March 1942): 291.

29. Gilbert C. Din and Abraham P. Nasatir, The Imperial Osages (Norman: Univ.
of Oklahoma Press, 1983), p. 268.

30. Ibid.

31. W W Graves, Life and Letters of Father Ponziglione (St. Paul, Kans.: W W
Graves, 1916), p. 131; see also, Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II: 164.

32. Hereafter, we shall use the same terms to distinguish between these two
groups of Little Osages. See Burns, Baptisms.

33. Berry, Chapman, and Mack, “Archaeological Remains,” 10: 1-11.

34. Loc. cit.

35. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II: 164; In a letter dated 12 De¬
cember 1785, Gov. Estevan Miro states, “The village of the Little Osages, of which
those who have settled upon the upper waters of the Arkansas are a part...”

36. W W Graves, The First Protestant Osage Missions: 1820-1837 (Oswego,Kans.:
Carpenter Press, 1949), pp. 179-180.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 501

37. Loc. cit.

38. Loc. cit.

39. Tillie Karns Newman, The Black Dog Trail (Boston: Christopher Publishing
House, 1957), p. 36.

40. W W Graves, History of Neosho Count (St. Paul, Kans: Journal Press, 1949,
reprint, Osage Mission Historical Society, 1986), pp. 103-104.

41. Ibid., p. 114.

42. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages, p. 260.

43. Carl H. Chapman, “The Indomitable Osage in Spanish Illinois, 1763-1804,”
The Spanish in the Mississippi Valley, 1762-1804, ed. John Francis McDermott (Chi¬
cago: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1974), p. 299.

44. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages.

45. Francis La Flesche, A Dictionary of the Osage Language, Bureau of American
Ethnology, Bulletin 109, p. 125.

46. Burns, Baptisms, p. 137.

47. John Francis McDermott, ed., Tixier’s Travels on the Osage Prairies (Norman:
Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1968), p. 128m

48. Tsi shu Wa ti an ka is a second name of Molt se Num pa or Iron Necklace; both
of these names are traditional Tsi shu Peace Maker names. See M. P. Fitzgerald, Bea¬
con on the Plains (St. Paul: Osage Mission Historical Society, 1985), p. 85.

49. Loc. cit.

50. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. Ill: 299.

51. Burns, Baptisms, p. 541.

52. Loc. cit.

53. Graves, History of Neosho County, pp. 18-26.

54. Burns, Baptisms, p. 375.

55. Graves, Life of Father Ponziglione, p. 131.

56. It should be noted that Osages are named in the clan of their father. Since
Baptiste's father had no Osage clan, even though he was half Osage and married to
White Hair’s daughter, Baptiste had to be adopted before he could be named. The
Isolated Earth clan presided over all naming ceremonies, so Baptiste was apparently
adopted by this clan. He had to be named before he could become a chief.

57. McDermott, Tixier’s, pp. 126-129.

58. A.T. Andreas, History of the State of Kansas (Atchison, Kans.: Atchison County
Historical Society, 1976), p. 1466; Burns, Baptisms.

59. Burns, Baptisms.

60. McDermott, Tixier’s.

61. Fitzgerald, Beacon.

62. Burns, Baptisms.

63. McDermott, Tixier’s.

64. James R. Mead, “The Little Arkansas,” Transactions, Kansas State Historical
Society, 1907-1908, ed. George W Martin, 10: 9.

65. Newman, Black Dog Trail, pp. 25-26.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

502 / Notes

66. George C. Sibley, “Extracts from the Diary of Major Sibley,” Chronicles of
Oklahoma, 5 (June 1927): 196-209.

67. Andreas, History of the State of Kansas, p. 1521.

68. Graves, Life of Father Ponziglione, p. 54.

69. Andreas, History of the State of Kansas, p. 1587.

70. James R. Christianson, “The Kansas-Osage Border War of 1874,” Chronicles
of Oklahoma, 63 (Fall 1985): 292-311.

71. Newman, Black Dog Trail, pp. 127-131.

72. Thomas Nuttall, Travels into the Arkansas Territory, p. 19m.

73. Grant Foreman, Indians and Pioneers (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,

1967) , p. 91.

74. Ibid., p. 122.

75. Burns, Indian Bands.

76. Newman, Black Dog Trail, p. 36.

77. Grant Foreman, Advancing the Frontier (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,

1968) , p. 119.

78. Ibid., p. 120.

79. Orel Busby, “Buffalo Valley: An Osage Hunting Ground,” Chronicles of Okla¬
homa, 40 (Spring 1962): 22-23.

80. Nuttall, Travels into Arkansas Territory, p. 23m.

81. Foreman, Indians and Pioneers, p. 23m

82. Sibley, Diary of Major Sibley, pp. 209-218.

83. Foreman, Advancing the Frontier, p. n6n.

84. La Flesche, Dictionary of the Osage Language.

CHAPTER 3

1. C. C. Royce and C. Thomas, “Indian Land Policy of the United States,” / 8 th
Annual Report, i8g6-i8gy, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian.

2. Loc. cit.

3. Loc. cit.

4. The distinction between Croum and Royal is that Crown denotes public own¬
ership and Royal denotes ownership by a monarch. In the American system of gov¬
ernment we do not have a monarch; therefore, Royal ownership does not appear.
However, Crown ownership appears as piddic domain in our system of government.

5. T. J. Morgan, Fifty-Eighth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs,
1889, pp. 3-4.

6. J. Eric S. Thompson, Maya Archaeologist (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,
1971), p. 211.

7. Walter Prescott Webb, The Great Frontier (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1952),
pp. 18-24.

8. Houck, History of Missouri, p. 133.

9. Yves F. Zoltvany, “New France and the West, 1701-1713,” Canadian Historical
Review, 46 (December 1965): 317-319.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 503

10. Mathews, Children of the Middle Waters, p. 168.

11. W. David Baird, The Osage People (Phoenix: Indian Tribal Series, 1972), pp.
18-19.

12. Wedel, Kansas Archaeology, pp. 26-32.

13. Baird, Osage People.

14. Abraham P. Nasatir, Before Lewis and Clark, vol. 1 (St. Louis: St. Louis His¬
torical Documents Foundation, 1952), pp. 12-27 (author's proof copy).

15. Baird, Osage People, p. 20.

16. Nasatir, Lewis and Clark.

17. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 223.

18. Houck, History of Missouri, p. 180.

19. Mathews, p. 227.

20. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages, p. 54.

21. Louis Francis Burns, Turn of the Wheel (San Marcos, Calif.: A. M. Graphics,
1980), pp. 209-210, 189-194.

22. Gibson, American Indian, pp. 95-96.

23. Miguel de Cervantes, Don Quixote de la Mancha, ed. Robert M. Hutchins,
Great Books of the Western World, vol. 28 (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952);
Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Quixote, ed. Julian Marias (New York: W W
Norton, 1963).

24. Chapman, “Indomitable Osages,” p. 287; Dr. Chapman was killed in an auto
accident in the spring of 1987. His death was a great loss to all who study the Osage
Indians.

25. Gibson, p. in.

26. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages, p. 58.

27. Abraham P. Nasatir, Borderland in Retreat (Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mex¬
ico, 1976), pp. 18-19; see also Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. I, Vol. II:
214-218.

28. Ibid., p. 228.

29. Loc. cit.

30. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” pp. 219-220.

31. Ibid., pp. 195-107.

32. Ibid., Pt. II, Vol. Ill: 230-231.

33. Ibid., Pt. Ill, Vol. IV: XVII-XX.

34. Ibid., Pt. I, Vol. II: 204-205.

35. Ibid, Pt. II, Vol. Ill: XXXI-XXXII.

36. Ibid., XXXI-XXXII, 171-173.

37. Loc. cit.

38. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages, p. 150.

39. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II, Vol. Ill: 187-188.

40. Foreman, Indians and Pioneers, p. 15.

41. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II, Vol. Ill: 312.

42. Ibid., pp. 316-317.

43. Ibid., p.256.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

504 / Notes

44. Ibid., p.203.

45. Foreman, p. 14.

46. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II, Vol. Ill: 200.

47. Foreman, p. i8n.

48. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” pp. 335-336.

49. Kinnaird, ibid., p. 246-247.

50. Ibid., pp. 315-316.

51. Ibid., pp. 273-274.

52. Ibid., pp. 284-285.

53. Some Osage mixed-bloods may be interested in knowing that Sylvester La-
badie was trading among the Osages at this time. Perez had him present his de¬
mands to the Osages. The Labadies are a well-known mixed-blood family.

54. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II, Vol. IV: 312.

55. Ibid., p. 196.

56. See Wilcomb Washburn, “The Writing of American History: A Status Re¬
port,” Pacific Historical Review, 40 (August 1971): 261-281. In this otherwise excel¬
lent article, there is a point made of the fact that a good general history of the
American Indian has not been written. This seems to be a contradiction of reality.
One cannot lump the varied Indian nations into one generalized mold and have an
American Indian history. It would be the old “all Indians are alike” theme disguised
as history.

57. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. I, Vol. II: 393.

58. Ibid.

59. Ibid.

60. Ibid.,Pt. II, Vol. Ill: 281.

61. Ibid., pp. 331-332.

62. Ibid., p. 35.

63. Ibid., pp. 295-296.

64. Ibid., p.406.

65. Ibid., p. 23.

66. Ibid., Pt. Ill, Vol. IV: 56.

67. Ibid., p. 94.

68. Ibid.,p. 107.

69. Loc. cit.

70. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” p. 148.

71. Ibid.,pp. 149-150.

72. Ibid., pp. 206-207.

73. Ibid., pp. 204-205.

74. Ibid., Pt. II, Vol. II: 414-417.

75. Din and Nasatir, Imperial Osages, p. 258.

76. Kinnaird, “Spain in Mississippi Valley,” Pt. Ill, Vol. IV: 290.

77. Ibid., pp. 299-300.

78. Loc. cit.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 505

79. Chapman, pp. 287-313. This is an excellent source of information about Ft.
Carondelet.

80. Thomas Bailey, A Diplomatic History of the American People (New York: F. S.
Crofts, 1947), p. 93.

CHAPTER 4

1. Ernest Staples Osgood, ed., The Field Notes of Captain William Clark, 1803-
1803 (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1964), p. 48m

2. Donald Jackson, ed., Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition with Related
Documents, 1783-1834, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Chicago: Univ, of Illinois Press, 1978), p.
198, #125.

3. Ibid., p. 199, #126.

4. Ibid.,pp. 199-200 n

5. Jackson, Lewis and Clark.

6. Jackson, Lewis and Clark, pp. 200-203, #i27n

7. While this request may seem innocent on the surface, it shows how well
Jefferson had prepared to meet the Osages. He certainly knew the Osage law with
regard to intruders. By making this request, he protected Pike and Marcy on their
expeditions into Osage territory.

8. Jackson, Lewis and Clark, p. 203m

9. Ibid., p. 203, #128.

10. Ibid., p. 308, #201.

11. Ibid., p. 66n.

12. Ibid., p. 234, #149.

13. Ibid., p. 238m

14. Ibid., pp. 259-260, #170.

15. Ibid., p.461.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid., p. 626m

18. Louis Francis Burns, Treaties, Constitution and Laws of the Osage Nation (Santa
Ana, Calif.: Louis F. Burns, 1967), p. 5.

19. Jackson, Lewis and Clark, pp. 623-625, #390.

CHAPTER 5

1. Miguel de Cervantes deals with this aspect of life in his immortal Don Quixote.

2. Almost any standard United States history textbook contains information
about this proclamation.

3. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, American
Indian and the Federal Government, n.d. (ca. 1965), p. 1.

4. Isidore Starr, Lewis Paul Todd, and Merle Curti, eds., “The Articles of Con¬
federation,” in Living American Documents, (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World,
1961), pp. 60-62.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

506 / Notes

5. Ibid., p. 65.

6. C. C. Royce and C. Thomas, “Indian Land Policy in the United States,”
Eighteenth Animal Report, 1896-1897, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian,
p. 640.

7. Starr, Todd, and Curti, Lining American Documents, p. 72.

8. Ibid., p. 78.

9. BIA, loc. cit.

10. The Jackson County, Missouri, Park System has been restoring Ft. Osage for
many years, and the project is almost completed.

11. Greed for honors among the Osages was comparable to greed for material
gain among the Americans.

12. One must keep in mind that the Osages had survived several severe earth¬
quakes, such as the New Madrid earthquake, December 15, 1811.

13. These lands were selected by the United States, but they were not assigned,
and the title remained with the American government. The plan was to later move
the Cherokee to assigned lands.

14. Burns, Baptisms, p. 137.

15. Ibid., p. 135.

16. These Osage hunting areas were the areas ceded by the Treaty of 1808. Un¬
der the Osage understanding of the agreement, these unoccupied and unassigned
areas were still Osage hunting territory.

17. Edwin C. Bearss and A. M. Gibson, Fort Smith: Little Gibraltar on the Arkansas
(Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1969).

18. When the Cherokee finally ventured out on the Plains to hunt buffalo, they
were beyond the safety of the forts. The buffalo tribes, including the Osages, fell
upon them at every turn. After a few hunts, the Cherokee abandoned hunting on
the Plains.

19. Ina Gabler, “Lovely’s Purchase and Lovely County,” Arkansas Historical Quar¬
terly, 19 (Spring i960): 31.

20. Ibid., p. 33.

21. Donald R. Englund, “Indians, Intruders, and the Federal Government) ” Jour¬
nal of the West, 13 (April 1974): 97-105.

22. Burns, Baptisms.

23. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 67.

24. George V Labadie, Osage Case for Federal Supervision, 15 February 1954, pp.
27-33 (Osage Tribal Council information booklet).

25. Jackson, Lewis and Clark, vol. 1, p. 137 map: Kinnaird, “Spain in the Missis¬
sippi Valley.”

CHAPTER 6

1. Annie Heloise Abel, “Proposals for an Indian State, 1778-1878,” Annual Re¬
port of the American Historical Association for 1907, vol. 1, p. 89.

2. Ibid., p. 92.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 507

3. Annie Heloise Abel, “The History of Events Resulting in Indian Consoli¬
dation West of the Mississippi River,” Annual Report of the American Historical Asso¬
ciation for the Year 1906, vol. 1, p. 241.

4. Zoltvany, “New France.”

5. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. II: 254-255, 269, Pt. Ill:
106, 127.

6. Abel, History, p. 241.

7. Ibid.

8. Louis Francis Burns, The Osage Annuity Rolls of 1878, vol. 1 (Fallbrook,
Calif.: Ciga Press, 1980), p. 4.

9. Abel, History, p. 245.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid., p. 270.

12. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. Ill: iio-m.

13. Mary Lou Drew, Letter dated 29 July 1985. Mrs. Drew is a descendant of
Antoine Penn.

14. Kinnaird, “Spain in the Mississippi Valley,” Pt. Ill: 22-23.

15. Joseph T. Manzo, “Emigrant Indian Objections to Kansas Residence,” Kansas
History, A Journal of the Central Plains, 4 (Winter 1981): 249.

CHAPTER 7

1. Abel, “History,” vol. 1, p. 290.

2. Ibid.

3. Edwin C. Bearss, “In Quest of Peace on the Indian Border: The Establish¬
ment of Fort Smith ’’Arkansas Historical Quarterly, 23 (Summer 1964): 123.

4. Bearss and Gibson, Fort Smith, p. 9.

5. Foreman, Indians and Pioneers, p. 7.

6. Wayne Morris, “Traders and Factories on the Arkansas Frontier, 1805-1822,”
Arkansas Historical Quarterly, 28 (Spring 1969): 38.

7. Foreman, Indians and Pioneers, pp. 47n, 161-164.

8. Nuttall, Travels into Arkansas Territory, p. 197.

9. Bearss and Gibson, Fort Smith, p. 13.

10. Ibid., pp. 22-23.

11. Bearss, “In Quest,” pp. 149-152.

12. Ibid.

13. Newman, Black Dog Trail, pp. 53-54.

CHAPTER 8

1. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1924, p. ii.

2. House. Senator A. S. Mike Monroney speaking on the Osage Indians of
Oklahoma to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. H. Con. Res. 108,83rd
Cong., 1st. sess., 22 July 1953, p. 12.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

508 / Notes

3. Harold W Ryan, ed., “Jacob Bright's Journal, of a Trip to the Osage Indians,”
The Journal of Southern History, 15 (November 1949): 519.

4. Josephy, Indian Heritage, pp. 4-5.

5. D’Arcy McNickle, “American Indians Who Never Were,” in The American
Indian Reader — Anthropology, ed. Jeannette Henry (San Francisco: Indian Historian
Press, 1972), p. 30.

6. Rudyard Kipling, The White Man’s Burden.

7. Donald A. Grinde, Jr., The Iroquois and the Founding of the American Nation
(San Francisco: Indian Historian Press, 1977), p. ix.

8. Francis Jennings, The Invasion of America (New York: W W Norton, 1975),pp.

15-31-

9. McNickle, American Indians, pp. 34-35.

10. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indians of the Central Plains, n.d., p. 6.

11. Swanton, Indian Tribes of North America.

12. This was a letter from Fr. Bax to Fr. De Smet, 1 June 1850. Graves, Life of Fr.
Ponziglione, p. 229.

13. Two sources for Catlin’s descriptions and sketches of Osages are: George
Catlin, Letters, Notes on Manners, Customs, and Conditions of the North American Indians,
vol. 2 (New York: Dover Publications, 1973); and Royal B. Hassrick, ed., The George
Catlin Book of American Indians (New York: Promontory Press, post-1977).

14. Washington Irving, A Tour on the Prairies, ed.John Francis McDermott (Nor¬
man: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1962), pp. 21-22.

15. Bill Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” Chronicles of Oklahoma, 41 (Fall 1963): 266.

16. Foreman comments, “Clairmont’s village” was near the present Claremore,
Oklahoma, Chouteau’s at Salina, and the Creek Agency near the mouth of the Ver¬
digris River. Advancing the Frontier, p. 119;

17. McDermott, Tixier’s, pp. 167-168.

18. Stanley Vestal, The Missouri (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1967), p. 214.

19. McDermott, Tixier’s, p. 211; Long’s expedition reported a similar ceremony
among the Otto. Strict truth was always spoken at these rites. This was especially
true of recitation of war honors.

20. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 25m

21. Ryan, “Jacob Bright’s Journal,” pp. 509, 516m

22. In English and to the Western mind, an inanimate object could not represent
life. In Osage and in the Osage mind, there is no conflict in expression in this state¬
ment. The earth and all upon it were alive.

23. Newman, The Black Dog Trail, p. 40.

24. Ibid.,p. 105.

25. McDermott, Tixier’s, pp. 140, 149.

26. J. Joseph Mathews, Talking to the Moon (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press,
1945 ). P- 174 -

27. A parflesche was a rawhide storage container. These were adorned with a
repeat geometric design on the cover. Each design was as distinctive as a person’s
signature.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 509

28. McDermott, Tixier’s, pp. 195-196.

29. Ibid.,p. 195.

30. Houck, History of Missouri, vol. i,p. 183.

31. Graves, Life of Father Ponziglione, p. 230.

32. Irving, A Tour on the Prairies, p. 42.

33. George F. Spaulding, ed., “Count Albert-Alexandre de Pourtales,” On the
Western Tour with Washington Irving (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1968), p. 46m

34. Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1908, vol. 2, part 2,
pp. 107-108.

35. James Mooney, “Calendar History of the Kiowa Indians,” Seventeenth An¬
nual Report, Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution, 1895-1896,

P- 259-

36. Ibid., pp. 258-260.

37. Ibid., pp. 168-171.

CHAPTER 9

1. Graves, First Protestant Osage Missions, p. 28.

2. This name refers to the bear, and it is a traditional name.

3. Graves, First Protestant Osage Missions, p. 87.

4. Everett Dick, Vanguards of the Frontier (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press,
I 94 I ). PP- 123-125.

5. Graves, First Protestant Osage Missions, pp. 6-7.

6. Ibid., pp. 77-78.

7. Ibid., pp. 77-78.

8. Ibid., pp. 219-220.

9. Ibid., pp. 212-220.

10. Mathews, Children of the Middle Waters, p. 527.

11. Graves, History of Neosho County, pp. 58-59.

12. Shakespeare, Hamlet, 3.1.57-69.

13. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 66-6j.

14. Ibid., pp. 32-41.

15. Ibid.

16. St. Regis was the second Catholic Indian school to be established in the
United States.

17. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 32-41.

18. Ibid., pp. 67-68.

19. Ibid.

20. Ibid., p. 7m, 77.

21. Ibid., p. 75.

22. Ibid.,pp. 79, 102-103.

23. The official name of Osage Mission was Mission of St. Francis de Hiero-
nymo (Jerome).

24. The Four Horsemen were death, famine, pestilence, and war. In the Catho-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

510 / Notes

lie Bible (Douay) the Four Horsemen are found in the Apocalypse of St.John the
Apostle of the New Testament (6: i—8). Christ rode the white horse, which was the
symbol of his gospel conquering the world. The other three horsemen represented
the judgments and punishment for those opposed to Christianity. War rode the red
horse, famine rode the black horse, and death rode the pale horse, which spread pes¬
tilence. We use this symbolism because the Osages did not live up to the responsi¬
bility Wa kon ta had placed upon them, which was to protect “the center of the
earth.” Thus, they turned to the faith of the black robes since Wa kon ta was angry
with them. Therefore, the four horsemen were sent to judge and punish them for
being unfaithful to their trust and faith.

CHAPTER io

1. Dorn was absent because of illness from 1851 to 1853; W S. S. Morrow served
at the Neosho Agency during Dorn’s illness.

2. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 165-166.

3. Burns, Baptisms.

4. Ibid., p.407.

5. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 165.

6. Ibid., pp. 187-188.

7. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856, Letter No. 45, pp. 135—

137 -

8. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 97.

9. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856.

10. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 162-164.

11. Graves, Life of Fr. Ponziglione, pp. 56-57.

12. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856.

13. Foreman, Advancing the Frontier, p. 121.

14. Mathews, Children of the Middle Waters, pp. 568-569.

15. Foreman, Advancing the Frontier, p. 133.

16. Newman, Black Dog Trail, p. 80.

17. Graves, Life of Father Ponziglione, pp. 187-188.

18. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 86; see also. Graves, Life of Father Ponziglione, p. 147.

19. Burns, Baptisms, pp. 239-270, 375-379; see also, Graves, Life of Father Ponzi¬
glione, pp. 131-132.

20. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 93-94.

21. Valerie Tracey, “The Indian in Transition: The Neosho Agency 1850-1861,”
Chronicles of Oklahoma, 48 (Summer 1970): 164-182.

22. Newman, Black Dog Trail, p. 102.

23. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856, Letter No. 44, pp. 134-
135

24. Houck, History of Missouri, p. 181.

25. Nuttall, Travels into the Arkansas Territory, p. 193.

26. McDermott, Tixier’s, p. 125.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 511
CHAPTER ii

1. Noble L. Prentis, A History of Kansas (Topeka, Kans.: Caroline Prentis, 1909),
p. 90; see also, Bliss Isely and W M. Richards, Four Centuries in Kansas (Topeka: State
of Kansas, 1944), p. 132.

2. Benjamin Franklin, “Remarks Concerning the Indians of North America,”
Real West, January 1975, p. 23.

3. John Denton’s son was born after his death. This son,John Denton II, became
a U.S. Marshal in Indian Territory and was killed in a gunfight at Pawhuska, I.T., in
1892.

4. Garrick Mallery, “Pictographs of the North American Indians,” Fourth An¬
nual Report, Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, 1882-1883,
p. 84.

5. Fitzgerald, Beacon, p. 107.

6. Ellsworth Huntington, "The Red Man’s Continent,” in The Chronicles of
America Series, ed. Allen Johnson (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 1919), p. 6.

7. John H. Rohrer, “The Test Intelligence of Osage Indians,” Journal of Social
Psychology, 16 (August 1942): 99-105.

8. David A. Nichols, Lincoln and the Indians: Civil War Policies and Politics (Co¬
lumbia: Univ. of Missouri Press, 1978), p. 175.

9. Ibid.,p. 180.

10. Ibid.,pp. 181-182.

11. Ibid., p. 187.

12. Ibid., pp. 193-195-

13. Ibid., p. 8.

14. Before the Indian Claims Commission, The Osage Nation of Indians, Peti¬
tioner vs. The United States of America, Defendant, July, 1947; this is the introductory
brief. The case was later assigned No. 9., p. 30.

15. Nichols, Lincoln and the Indians, p. 24.

16. Michael L. Tate, “From Scout to Doughboy: The National Debate over Inte¬
grating American Indians into the Military, 1891-1918,” Western Historical Quarterly,
17 (October 1986): 417-437.

17. Fitzgerald , Beacon, p. 114.

18. Allan C. Ashcraft, “Confederate Indian Department Conditions in August,
1864,” Chronicles of Oklahoma, 41 (Autumn 1963): 283.

19. W W Graves, The Broken Treaty (St. Paul, Kans.: Journal, 1935), pp. 134-142.

20. Ibid., p. 211.

21. Ibid., p. 212.

22. Burns, Treaties.

23. William Lewis Bartles, “Massacre of Confederates by Osage Indians in
1863,” Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, 1903-1904, vol. 8, p. 6aff; George
E. Tinker and C.J. Phillips, eds., “Massacre of Confederate Officers by Osages,”
Osage Magazine, February 1910, pp. 49-52.

24. It would be more accurate to say the creation of Kansas Territory in May of

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

512 / Notes

1854 ended Indian Territory in Kansas. However, with statehood, Kansas ended the
last Indian Territory connections and set about the task of removing all the Indians
from the state.

25. Nichols, Lincoln and the Indians, p. 39.

26. Ibid., p. 48.

27. James R. Mead, "The Wichita Indians in Kansas,” Transactions, Kansas State
Historical Society, 1903-1904, vol. 8, p. 175.

28. Stan Hoig, "War for Survival,” Chronicles of Oklahoma, 62 (Fall 1984): 273.

29. Nichols, Lincoln and the Indians, p. 62.

30. Nichols, Lincoln and the Indians.

31. Gibson, American Indian, pp. 384-386.

32. Ibid.

CHAPTER 12

1. David Parson, "The Removal of the Osages from Kansas” (Ph.D. diss., Univ.
of Oklahoma, 1940), p. v.

2. Reginald Horsman, “American Indian Policy and the Origins of Manifest
Destiny,” in The Indian in American History, ed. Francis Paul Prucha (New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1971), p. 22, 21.

3. Frederic L. Paxson, “The Pacific Railroads and the Disappearance of the
Frontier in America,” in Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1907,

vol. 1, p. III.

4. H. Craig Miner and William E. Unrau, The End of Indian Kansas (Lawrence:
Regents Press of Kansas, 1978), p. 82.

5. Ibid., p. 39.

6. S. Lyman Tyler, A History of Indian Policy, Department of the Interior, Bureau
of Indian Affairs (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1973), pp. 84-85.

7. Klaus J. Hansen, “The Millennium, the West and Race in the Antebellum
American Mind,” Western Historical Quarterly, 3 (October 1972): 376.

8. Francis Paul Prucha, ed., Documents of United States Indian Policy (Lincoln:
Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1975), p. 140.

9. Ibid., pp. 140-141.

10. Ibid., pp. 131-132.

11. Nellie Snyder Yost, Medicine Lodge: The Story of a Kansas Frontier Town (Chi¬
cago: Swallow Press, 1970), p. 23.

12. William E. Connelley, "The Treaty Held at Medicine Lodge,” Collections,
Kansas State Historical Society, 1926-1928, 17: 601-603.

13. Ibid., p.603.

14. Yost, Medicine Lodge, p. 27.

15. Ibid., p. 32.

16. Connelley, Treaty, p. 603.

17. Prentis, History of Kansas, p. 179.

18. Ibid.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 513

19. Connelley, Treaty ; p. 605.

20. Custer, Life, p. 272.

21. Tinker and Phillips, “Massacre.”

22. Graves, History of Neosho County, pp. 174-176.

23. I knew Mr. Herard very well. He taught me how to make rawhide quirts
and twine ropes. I have heard him tell this story many times. See Graves, ibid.

24. Burns, Baptisms, p. 145.

25. John W Morris, Charles R. Goins, and Edwin C. McReynolds, Historical Atlas
of Oklahoma, 3rd ed. (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1986), p. 27.

26. Connelley, Treaty, p. 606.

27. Custer, Life, pp. 325-326.

28. Morris, “Traders.”

29. Donald Lockhart, “Early History of Elk Falls,” Collections, Kansas State His¬
torical Society, 1928, 17: 842-43.

30. Prucha, Indian Policy, pp. 116-117.

31. Ralph K. Andrist, The Long Death: The Last Days of the Plains Indians (New
York: Macmillan, 1964), p. 159.

CHAPTER 13

1. Paul Wallace Gates, Fifty Million Acres: Conflicts over Kansas Land Policy, 1854-
1890 (New York: Atherton Press, 1966), pp. 195-196.

2. Ibid.

3. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 11-12.

4. Before the Indian Claims Commission, No. 9, The Osage Nation of Indians,
Petitioner vs. The United States of America, Defendant, Request for Findings of Fact,

p. 6.

5. Ibid., p. 5.

6. Ibid., p. 16.

7. Burns, Treaties; see also Charles J. Kappler, Indian Affairs, Laws and Treaties, vol.
1 (Washington: GPO, 1904) pp. 878-883.

8. Two of these families had the surnames of Dias and Garcia. See Burns, Bap¬
tisms, pp. 306, 344.

9. These three schools were Negro schools. Some Southern slave-holding na¬
tions were required to grant citizenship to their former slaves. This was part of
Indian Reconstruction after the Civil War, thus, in a citizenship sense, these Negroes
were “Indian.” Before the Indian Claims Commission, The Osage Nation of Indi¬
ans, No number. Petitioner vs. The United States of America, Defendant, July 1947,
P- 30 .

10. Burns, Treaties, p. 35.

11. Claims, Findings, p. 11.

12. Ibid., p. 10.

13. Ibid., p. 7.

14. Ibid., p. 8.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

514 / Notes

15. Ibid., pp. 8-9.

16. Ibid., pp. 25-26.

17. Graves, History of Neosho County, p. 401.

18. Prentis, History of Kansas, p. 353.

19. Ralph A. Barney, Laws Relating to the Osage Tribe of Indians (Pawhuska, Okla.:
Osage Printery, 1929), p. n; 16 Stat. L. 55.

20. Ibid., p. 25; 21 Stat. L. 291; Commissioner’s Report for 1880, p. 199.

21. Gates, Conflicts, p. 214.

22. Ibid., p. 216.

23. 12 Stat. 772-774.

24. 14 Stat. 289-291.

25. Anna Heloise Abel, “Indian Reservations in Kansas and the Extinguishment
of their Title,’’ Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, 1903-1904, 8: 107-108.

26. Miner and Unrau, End of Indian Kansas, p. 130.

27. Gates, Conflicts, p. 218.

28. C. E. Cory, “The Osage Ceded Lands,” Transactions, Kansas State Historical
Society, 1903-1904, 8: 191-192.

29. David Kay Strate, Sentinel to the Cimarron: The Frontier Experience of Fort
Dodge, Kansas (Dodge City, Kans.: Cultural Heritage and Arts Center, 1970), p. 108;
House Reports, 46th Cong., 2nd sess.. Bill Number 3191, No. 723, pp. 1-3; and U.S.
House Executive Documents, 47th Cong., 1st sess.. Number 195 (Serial 2031), pp.
i- 5 -

30. Miner and Unrau, End of Indian Kansas, p. 132.

CHAPTER 14

1. This was the total acreage of the Trust Lands. Possibly as much as 200,000
acres were under sales contract. Many of these contracts defaulted because of hard
times. It was after 1872 before the Osages received any money from the Trust Lands.

2. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 135-136.

3. Ibid., p. 92.

4. Abel, “Indian Reservations,” 3: 109.

5. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on Indian Affairs,
Hearing on H. Con. Res. 108, 83rd Cong., 1st sess., 22 July 1953, p. 15.

6. T. E Morrison, “The Osage Treaty of 1865,” Collections, Kansas State Histori¬
cal Society, 1926-1928, 17: 696.

7. Cory, “Ceded Lands,” p. 190.

8. This question of the constitutionality of the Court interpreting the Consti¬
tution was the basic states rights argument leading to the Civil War. Thus, by force
of arms, the Court has assumed the power to interpret the Constitution. In effect,
this decision was the first to be made without regional protest after the Civil War.

9. 16 Stat. L. 495.

10. Stat. L. XVI, 362.

11. 17 Stat. 228.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 515

12. 16 Stat. L. 544.

13. Royce and Thomas, “Indian Land Policy,’’ p. 853.

14. 17 Stat. L, 122.

15. 17 Stat. 228.

CHAPTER 15

1. Parson, “Removal,’’ pp. 13-14.

2. Gates, Conflicts, p. 200.

3. Parson, “Removal,” p. 17.

4. Berlin B. Chapman, “Removal of the Osages from Kansas,” Kansas Historical
Quarterly, 7 (August/September 1938): 290.

5. Parson, “Removal,” p. 29.

6. Ibid.

7. Ibid.

8. Ibid., p. 31.

9. Ibid., p. 32.

10. Ibid., pp. 38-41.

11. Gates, Conflicts, pp. 203-204.

12. Ibid., pp. 204-205.

13. Parson, “Removal,” p. 81.

14. Ibid., pp. 71-72.

15. Ibid.

16. Gates, Conflicts, pp. 200-201.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid., pp. 202-203.

19. Prucha, Indian Policy, p. 115.

20. Ibid., p. 116.

21. Thomas A. Bailey, A Diplomatic History of the American People (New York: F. S.
Crofts, 1947), pp. 401-403.

22. Parson, “Removal,” p. 86.

23. Prucha, Indian Policy, p. 136; 16 Stat. 566.

24. Miner and Unrau, End of Indian Kansas, p. 108.

25. Cory, “Ceded Lands," pp. 187-188.

26. Frederic Jackson Turner’s frontier sequence is discussed in George Rogers
Taylor, ed., The Turner Thesis, Problems in American Civilization Series (Boston:
D. C. Heath, 1956), p. 6.

27. Gates, Conflicts, pp. 221-222.

28. Parson, “Removal,” p. 158.

29. Ibid.,pp. 139-140.

30. Ibid., pp. 152-153-

31. Ibid., p. 146.

32. Ibid., p. 141.

33. In Greek mythology, the dilemma was a gigantic bull. When a person was

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

516 / Notes

caught between his horns, they were gored no matter which way they turned. The
Osages could fight and get “gored” with extinction or they could keep the peace
and hope they would not be “gored” by the mobs of intruders.

34. Louis Francis Burns, “Osage History: Part Seven,” Osage Nation News, Feb¬
ruary 1986; This is from a series of feature articles on Osage history.

35. Ibid. All the preceding mixed-blood paragraphs are taken from this source.

36. William P. Mathes was stepson to John Mathews and was probably a South¬
ern sympathizer. He remained among the Cherokees, like many other Osages, after
the Civil War. Mathes used a variety of names, such as Bill Nix, Bill Nixon, and
Bill Mathews, as well as Bill Mathes. However, his Osage name was Ha pa Shu tsy
or Red Corn. He was a Baptist minister.

37. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 101-103.

38. Augustus Tinker was a likely candidate for one of the guilty ones. He fled
the Osage nation leaving a wife and son who died a year later. Records show he
collected his annuity until the June 1873 payment, which he did not collect. It is
believed he fled to Georgia. In any event, he never returned to the Osages.

39. Parson, “Removal” pp. 108-109.

40. W C. Vanderwerth, ed, Indian Oratory (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,
1979), p. 224.

41. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 112-113.

42. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1873, p. 218.

43. Parson, “Removal” pp. 121-122.

CHAPTER 16

1. Four sources now show that the move was not simple and that it entailed a
great amount in lost lives and suffering. These sources are: 1) The tombstones along
the Caney River watershed; 2) The Osage Annuity Rolls; 3) Eye witness accounts
of mixed-bloods who made the move; and 4) An indexed, cross-referenced version
of the Osage Mission Register.

2. Tracey, “Indian in Transition,” pp. 164-183; “Official Kansas Roster: United
States Indian Agencies Affecting Kansas,” Collections, Kansas State Historical Society,
1923-1925, 16: 722-745; Parson, “Removal,” p. 10 n. 24.

3. In the Osage idiom a clear, cloudless day meant a long, peaceful life. The
foregoing discussion of Gibson is taken from Burns, “Osage History: Part Nine”
(March 1986).

4. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 178-179.

5. Ibid., p. 173.

6. Ibid., p. 175.

7. Barney, Laws, pp. 12-13; t6 Stat. L. 335.

8. Parson, “Removal” pp. 201-202.

9. Ibid.

10. Chapman, “Removal,” pp. 290-292.

11. Parson, “Removal,” p. 210.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 517

12. Ibid., pp. 215-216.

13. Ibid., pp. 241-242.

14. "[I]t is the duty of the United States Indian agent for the Cherokees to have
such persons, not lawfully residing or sojourning therein, removed from the nation,
as they now are, or hereafter may be, required by the Indian intercourse laws of the
United States.” Kappler, Indian Affairs, p. 950; 14 Stat. 799.

15. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 241-243.

16. Chapman, “Removal,” pp. 296-297; The foregoing requests are included.

17. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 247-248.

18. Ibid., p. 261.

19. Ibid., pp. 261-264.

20. Ibid., p. 181.

21. Barney, Laws, p. 12.

22. Ibid., pp. 24-25.

23. Parson, “Removal,” p. 251.

24. Abel, “Indian Reservations,” 8: 109.

25. A notable exception to this is the doctoral dissertation of Dr. Tanis Thorne,
“People of the River: Mixed-Blood Families on the Lower Missouri,” (Ph.D. diss.,
Univ. of California, 1987).

26. This title, Wa co Ki he ka or Woman Chief, was usually bestowed on the wife
of a chief. Sophia was given this title for actually being a chief.

27. For details about these families see Burns, Turn of the Wheel.

28. Burns, Annuity Rolls.

29. This was the split between White Hair’s people and Claremore’s people.

30. Chapman, “Removal,” p. 295.

31. It was customary to include any full-bloods who lived with the mixed-
bloods in the half-breed term. Likewise, mixed-bloods living with the full-bloods
were called full-bloods.

32. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 266-267.

33. Ibid., pp. 267-268; the sixth name cannot be read because the original docu¬
ment has an ink blot over it.

34. Ibid., pp. 270-271.

35. Ruby Cranor, Caney Valley Ghost Towns and Settlements (Bartlesville, Okla.:
Blackman Printing, 1985), p. 54.

36. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 234-236.

37. Morris, Goins, and McReynolds, Atlas, p. 2.

38. The jimson weed was named after Jamestown, Virginia, by the first English
settlers in 1607. This weed flourishes on the sites of abandoned human habitation.
The particular site had been used sporadically by humans for at least two thousand
years.

39. The Elgin Post Office was established February 27, 1871; Robert W Baugh¬
man, Kansas Post Office (Topeka: Kansas State Historical Society, 1961), p. 38.

40. George W Martin, “The Boundary Lines of Kansas,” Collections, Kansas State
Historical Society, 1909-1910, n: 55-56, 60-61.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

518 / Notes

41. Parson, “Removal,” p. 219.

42. Ibid., pp. 220-221.

43. Ibid., p.229.

44. Ruby Cranor (Ghost Towns) interviewed Caney, Kansas, residents who re¬
membered the competition between Caney and Ennisville. One gentleman showed
her the remaining ruins of Ennisville. It was definitely south of the state line.

45. Parson, “Removal,” pp. 232-236.

46. Cranor, Ghost Towns, pp. 44-45.

47. Ibid.

48. Federal Archives and Records Center, Fort Worth, Texas, Region 7, Records
of the Osage Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs (Record Group 75), Records 195-
197.

CHAPTER 17

1. The foregoing topic on Isaac T. Gibson was taken from Burns, “Osage His¬
tory: Part 10,” Osage Nation News, April 1986.

2. Frank F. Finney, “The Osage and their Agency during the Term of Isaac T.
Gibson, Quaker Agent,” Chronicles of Oklahoma, 36 (Winter 1958-59): 419.

3. Parson, “Removal,” p. 277.

4. Chapman, “Removal.”

5. Parson, “Removal,” p. 278.

6. “Silver Lake Early Trade Center,” Oklahoma Rural News, October 1978, p. 10.

7. Chapman, “Removal,” p. 399.

8. Ibid., p.402.

9. Ibid., p.404.

10. Ibid., pp. 296-297.

11. Ibid., p.405.

12. Kappler, Indian Affairs, vol. 2, p. 947.

13. Henry Campbell Black, Black’s Law Dictionary (St. Paul, Minn.: West Pub¬
lishing, 1951), p. 742.

14. Chapman, “Removal,” p. 289.

15. Parson, “Removal,” p. 254.

16. Chapman, “Removal,” pp. 299-300.

17. Ibid., p.400.

18. Ibid., p.403.

19. Ibid., p.409.

20. Brief and Argument on Right of Osage Allottees and Purchasers—Mineral
Trust (Tulsa, Okla.: Osage Oil and Gas Lessees Association, December, 1920), p. 2.

21. Parson, “Removal,” p. 283.

22. Miner and Unrau, End of Indian Kansas, p. 137.

23. Parson, “Removal,” p. 280.

24. Ibid., p.284.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 519

25. Wahshouwahgaley or Frank F. Finny, Pioneer Days with the Osage Indians West
of ‘96 (Private Printing, 1972), p. 10.

26. Osage Council Information Letter: Development of the Osage Reservation
and Summary of Special Laws Governing the Osage Tribe, pp. 1-2.

27. Laban J. Miles, Report to the Commissioner, 1882, p. 72; 1890, p. 189; and
1891. P- 353 -

28. Isaac T. Gibson to Enoch Hoag, Report to the Commissioner, September
1873, p. 215.

29. Ibid., pp. 215-216.

30. Fitzgerald, Beacon, pp. 245-249.

31. Annual Report, 1873, p. 218; 1875, pp. 37, 74, and 277.

32. Ibid., p. 218.

33. Statement of Facts, In the Matter of the Claim of Kingsbery and Holmsley
for Relief, On Account of the Wrongful Appropriation by the Osage Nation of
Indians of 238 Head of Cattle belonging to said Kingsbery and Holmsley, in the
Years 1874-75.

34. Annual Report, 1873, p. 217.

35. Ibid., p. 216.

36. Louis Francis Burns, Osage Indian Customs and Myths (Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga
Press, 1984), pp. 143-144.

37. Annual Report, 1873, p. 217.

38. Annual Report, 1875, p. 280.

39. James R. Christianson, “The Kansas-Osage Border War of 1874,“ Chronicles
of Oklahoma, 63: 300.

40. George W Martin, comp., Osage Troubles in Barber County, Kansas 1874
(Topeka, Kans., 1875).

41. 23 Stat. L. 446, 464; 19 Stat. L. 292.

42. Annual Report, 1875, pp. 276-277.

43. Ibid.

44. Ibid., p. 74.

CHAPTER 18

1. Cyrus Beede, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1876, p. 54.

2. Ibid.

3. Frank F. Finney, Sr., “Progress in the Civilization of the Osage” Chronicles
of Oklahoma 40 (Spring 1962): 3.

4. For incidents in Miles’s life as Osage agent, see J. Joseph Mathews, Wall’ Kon-
Tah (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1932).

5. Laban J. Miles, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1880, p. 76.

6. Commissioners Report, 1891, p. 122.

7. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 1898, p. 241.

8. Miles, 1890, vol. 1, p. 193.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

520 / Notes

9. Miles, 1891, p. 353.

10. Burns, Treaties, pp. 75-76.

11. Andrew J. Dorn, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856, pp.
I 34 -I 35 -

12. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, 1901, p. 327.

13. Laban J. Miles, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1879, p. 69.

14. Montesquieu, Spirit of Laws, p. 127.

15. Graves, Life of Fr. Ponziglione.

16. These are titles of honor among the Osages, that is, Ne ka Log ny, or Good
Man, and Wa co Log ny, or Good Woman. The titles were bestowed only upon those
who had lived their lives in the highest ideals of Osage culture.

17. This description is based on the Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian
Affairs, 1891, pp. 123-127.

18. Mathews, Children of the Middle Waters, p. 742.

19. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, 1899, P- 297.

20. Kent Ruth, et al., Oklahoma: A Guide to the Sooner State (Norman: Univ. of
Oklahoma Press, 1958), p. 333.

21. M. R. Harrington, U.S. Senate Documents on Peyote, Part I, Senate Bill 1399,
Part 1, 8 February 1937.

22. Fred Lookout, ibid.

23. Commissioner’s Report, 1879, p. XLIV

24. Carroll H. Potter, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1888,
p. 102.

25. Laban J. Miles, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1889, vol. 2,
P- 03 -

26. Ibid., 1890, 190.

27. Ibid., 1879, p. 70.

CHAPTER 19

1. This is a matter of personal memory. Our father rented a “trap” pasture to
a thousand head of these cattle for an overnight stay.

2. Annual Report, 1875, pp. 276-281.

3. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1884, p. xxxix.

4. Robert M. Burrill, "The Establishment of Ranching on the Osage Reser¬
vation,” Geographic Review, 62 (October 1972): 532.

5. This paragraph was taken from Louis Francis Burns, “Jim Town: Elgin, Kan¬
sas,” The History of Chautauqua County, Kansas (Dallas: Curtis Media Corporation,
1987), p. 48.

6. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1886, p. 134.

7. Miles, 1889, p. 192.

8. Annual Report, 1886, p. 133.

9. Ibid.

10. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, 1900, p. 337.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 521

11. Miles, Commissioner’s, p. 83.

12. Ibid.

13. I knew these men very well as a boy and often listened to the stories they
told about the big ranches.

14. Burrill, “Establishment,” p. 536.

15. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1895, p. 37.

16. Commissioner’s Report, 1896, p. 38.

17. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 1898, p. 58.

18. Mitscher, Annual Report, Department of the Interior, p. 80.

19. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1901, pp.
77 - 79 -

20. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1904, pp.
79-81.

21. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1905, pp.
87-88.

22. Louis Francis Burns, ed., “The Elgin Brand Register, 1887-1907” (Kansas
State Historical Society, Oklahoma State Historical Society, Oklahoma City, 1981).

23. Sources checked were: Burns, “Brand Register”; Osage Comity Profiles (Okla¬
homa City: Bare and Curtis, 1978); The History of Chautauqua County, Kansas (Dal¬
las: Curtis Media Corporation, 1987);}. G. Sanders, Who’s Who Among Oklahoma
Indians (Oklahoma City: Trave Company, 1928); Burns, Annuity Rolls; Burns, Bap¬
tisms, Turn of the Wheel; and Sylvester J. Tinker, Authentic Osage Indian Roll Book
(Pawhuska, Okla.: Sam McClain, 1957).

24. Commissioner’s Report, 1884, pp. xiii-xiv.

25. Commissioner’s Report, 1890, pp. lxxi-lxxiii.

26. 26 Stat. L. 794.

27. Burrill, “Establishment,” p. 539.

28. Commissioner’s Report, 1890, p. 539.

29. Burrill, “Establishment,” pp. 534-535.

30. Burns, Treaties, 1896, p. 84.

31. Burrell, “Establishment.”

32. Burrell, “Establishment,” pp. 542-543.

33. Burrell, “Establishment.”

34. Ruth, et al., Sooner State, p. 335.

35. Not even the Osage grass could carry 16,000 head of cattle on 11,000 acres.
Today, the Chapman-Barnard headquarter ranch of 50,000 acres is a Nature Con¬
servancy Tall Grass Preserve. Ibid.

36. Thomas D. Isern, “Farmers, Ranchers, and Stockmen of the Flint Hills,”
Western Historical Quarterly, 16 (July 1985): 263.

CHAPTER 20

1. Finney, “Civilization of the Osage,” p. 2n; since the Neosho flows mainly
southward with only a slight easterly course, we can only assume the left or east side

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

522 / Notes

was indicated. However, this would seem to conflict with the Council Village, which
would probably be White Hair's Village. If this is true, the convention was held on
the right or west bank, since this was where White Hairs Village was located in
1861. Yet, Beaver, as chief counselor to White Hair, may well have hosted the con¬
vention in his village, which was on the left bank near Osage Mission.

2. Laban J. Miles, 1882, p. 731

3. Finney, “Civilization of the Osage,’’ p. 3.

4. American Indians and the Federal Government, United States Department of
the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, US Printing Office, n.d., p. 3.

5. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1900, pp.
I73-I74-

6. The administration of Ronald Reagan is marked by all these characteristics
as time will verify. Partisan feelings are too strong now to remove the blinders from
our eyes so we can have a full field of vision.

7. Annual Report, 1900, p. 339.

8. Monogenists argued that Indians were of the same species as the rest of man¬
kind and polygenists believed the Indian was a new species of man; see Robert E.
Bieder, “Scientific Attitudes Toward Indian Mixed-Bloods in Early Nineteenth
Century America,” Journal of Ethnic Studies, 8 (Summer 1980): 17-30.

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Chapman, “Dissolution,” p. 246m

14. 30 Stat. 90.

15. Burns, Treaties, p. 52.

16. See Opening of Rolls, Senate Hearing on Joint Resolution No. 70, March,
1908.

17. Barney, Laws, p. 42.

18. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1908, p. 115.

19. Chapman, “Dissolution,” pp. 244-245.

20. Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” p. 256.

21. Chapman, “Dissolution,” p. 384.

22. Ibid.

23. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1908, p. 116.

24. Kappler, Indian Affairs; In 1865, treaties were made with the Omaha; Winne¬
bago; Ponca; Snake; Osage; Mini-Conjou Sioux; Lower Brule Sioux; Cheyenne-
Arapaho; Apache, Cheyenne and Arapaho; Comanche-Kiowa; Blackfeet Sioux; Sans
Arcs Sioux; Hunkpapa Sioux; Yanktonai Sioux; Upper Yanktonai Sioux; Oglala
Sioux; and Middle Oregon Tribes. Land cessions were either stated or inferred in all
these treaties but the Osage treaty is the only one that mentioned payment for a
survey.

25. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1908, pp. 115-116.

26. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 1906, p. 160.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 523

27. The foregoing topic was based on information in the Commissioner’s Re¬
ports, 1898-1910.

28. Chapman, “Dissolution,” p. 386.

29. Barney, Laws, p. 53; 34 Stat. 459.

30. 61 Stat. 459.

31. 64 Stat. 215.

32. 92 Stat. 1660.

33. Chapman, “Dissolution,” p. 244.

34. Statement and Argument by the Osage Tribal Council on Behalf of the
Osage Tribe of Indians in Support of Legislation to Extend the Osage Mineral Trust,
ca. 1931, pp. 1-2.

35. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Subcommittee, Survey of Conditions of
Indians in the United States: Hearings on S. Res. yg, 78th Cong., 1st. Sess., Part 41, 2
August 1943, p. 22770.

36. American Indians, pp. 5-6.

37. Commissioner’s Report, 1891, pp. 18-22.

38. 41 Stat. L. 1249.

CHAPTER 21

1. Richard L. Douglas, "History of Manufactures in Kansas,” Collections, Kansas
State Historical Society, 1909-1910, 11: 135-140.

2. Michael Wallis, Oil Man (New York: Doubleday, 1988), p. 92.

3. Ibid., p. 60.

4. Ibid., p. 65.

5. Ibid., p. 86.

6. Before the Indian Claims Commission, No. 126, The Osage Nation of Indi¬
ans, Petitioner vs. The United States of America, Respondent, Petitioner’s Request for
Findings of Fact and Brief, Finding # 8 .

7. Willis, Oil Man, p. 85.

8. Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” p. 255.

9. Willis, Oil Man, p. 86.

10. Ibid., p. 87.

11. Ibid., pp. 87-89.

12. Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” p. 256.

13. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1909,
P- 5 i-

14. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1904, pp.
88-89.

15. Willis, Oil Man, pp. 145-146.

16. Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” p. 258: Wallis, Oil Man, pp. 147-148.

17. Labadie, Osage Case, pp. 60-61.

18. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1924, p. 14.

19. Willis, Oil Man, pp. 92-96.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

524 / Notes

20. Ibid., pp. 89-90.

21. Ibid., pp. 130-132.

22. Statement and Argument by the Osage Tribal Council on Behalf of the
Osage Tribe of Indians in Support of Legislation to Extend the Osage Mineral Trust
[first renewal], pp. 6-8.

23. Ibid., pp. 8-9. East-side and west-side are often used in the Osage. The di¬
viding line between the two is the line between ranges 7E and 8E.

24. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1921, pp. 17-18.

25. Ibid.

26. J. Joseph Mathews, Life and Death of an Oilman (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma
Press, 1985), p. 116.

27. Proposal of Fifteen Oil Companies to Council, August 5, 1947, Waterflood.

28. Ibid.

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid.

31. Justification, Brief and Argument of the Osage Tribal Council for Extension
of the Osage Mineral Trust Period, November 18, 1963, Exhibit 3, pp. 1-6.

32. Labadie, Osage Case, pp. 10-12.

33. Before the Indian Claims Commission, No. 126, Osage Nation vs. The United
States of America; Before the Indian Claims Commission, No. 127, Osage Nation vs.
The United States of America.

34. T. J. Leahy, Brief and Argument on Right of Osage Allotees and Purchasers — Min¬
eral Trust (Tulsa, Okla.: Osage Oil and Gas Lessees Association), December, 1920, pp.
3 - 9 -

35. Statement [first renewal], pp. 3-6.

36. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on Indian Affairs,
Hearing on H. Con. Res. 108, 83rd Cong., 1st sess., 22 July 1953, p. 58.

37. John Donne, “Meditation XVII,” Devotions upon Emergent Occasions.

38. Terry P. Wilson, The Underground Reservation: Osage Oil (Lincoln: Univ. of
Nebraska Press, 1985), p. 174.

39. Ibid.

40. Ibid., p. 174.

41. Ibid., pp. 178-185.

42. Logan vs. Andrus, 77-C-363-C U.S. Dist. Ct. (1978).

43. Memorandum from Scott Keep to Field Solicitor, Pawhuska, September 27,
1979; Copy to Regional Solicitor, Tulsa.

44. Ibid.

45. “Osage Oil Wealth Fading,” Literary Digest, 113 (14 May 1932): 43.

46. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1901, pp.
612-613.

47. Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part i,i904,p. 301.

48. Ibid., p.297.

49. William G. Shepherd, “Lo the Rich Indian,” Harper’s Magazine, November
1920, p. 723.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 525

50. Ibid.

51. Ibid.

52. G. Edward Tinker, testimony, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Subcom¬
mittee, Survey of Conditions of Indians in the United States: Hearings on S. Res. 79, 78th
Cong., 1st. Sess., 2 and 3 August 1943, Part 41, pp. 23018-23020.

53. Bureau of Indian Affairs, The Osage People and Their Trust Property, Field Re¬
port prepared by Jessie Bloodworth, Osage Agency, Anadarko Area Office, April 30,
1953 . P- 5 i-

54. Ibid., p. 50.

55. Ibid., p. 57.

56. Ibid., p. 68.

57. Ibid., p. 72.

58. This is a family account. A slightly different version of this murder is in
Arthur H. Lamb, Tragedies of the Osage Hills (Pawhuska, Okla.; Osage Printery, ca.
1930), pp. 97-98.

59. Burchardt, “Osage Oil,” p. 264.

60. Ibid., p.263.

61. Travelers in the Mists was a clan of the Wa sha she subdivision; traditionally,
they led the way whenever the Osage people were on the move or changing. The
reference to the middle people refers to the ancient Osage name, Ni U Kon ska or
People of the Middle Waters.

62. 45 Stat. 899-1928.

63. This section was compiled from the following sources: Wilson, Underground,
pp. 145-146; Wallis, Oil Man, pp. 151-152; Lamb, Tragedies, pp. 151-201.

64. Laban J. Miles, Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1884, p. 83.

65. Shepherd, “Lo the Rich Indian,” p. 723.

66. Ibid., p.731.

67. Ibid., p.734.

68. Ibid.

CHAPTER 22

1. William Brandon, “American Indians and History,” American West 2 (Spring
1965): 14.

2. Arrell Morgan Gibson, ed., Between Two Worlds: The Survival of Twentieth Cen¬
tury Indians (Oklahoma Historical Society, 1986).

3. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 43.

4. William Brandon, Last Americans, p. 20.

5. Alan Linn, “Corn, the New World’s Secret Weapon and the Builder of its
Civilizations,” Smithsonian, August 1973, p. 59.

6. “The Native American: A Changing Perspective,” The American West 10
(July 1973): 48; Brandon, Last Americans, p. 2.

7. See Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, #39. Bacon gives the Idols of the Mind
as the idols of the tribe; idols of the den; idols of the market; and idols of the theatre.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

526 / Notes

That is, as we grow, our family and relations as well as our business associates and
entertainment shape our thinking. Thus, the Idols of the Mind get in the way when
we seek truth.

8. Grinde, Founding of the American Nation, p. X.

9. Jacqueline Peterson and Jennifer S. H. Brown, The New Peoples: Being and
Becoming Metis in North America (Winnipeg: Univ. of Manitoba Press, 1985), p. 3.

10. Brandon, Last Americans, p. 21.

11. William T. Hagan, The Indian in American History, (Baltimore: Waverly Press,
1968).

12. Paxson, “Disappearance,” p. 107.

13. Brandon, Last Americans, p. 19.

14. William Brandon, New Worlds for Old: Reports from the New World and their
Effect on the Development of Social Thought in Europe, 1500-1800 (Athens: Ohio Univ.
Press, 1986), p. 164.

15. Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 31.

16. Brandon, Last Americans, p. 10.

17. Hagan, Indian in American History, p. 6.

18. For some idea of the Osage effect, see Foreman, Indians and Pioneers, p. 9; and
Paxson, “Disappearance,” pp. 108, 111.

19. Gibson, American Indian, pp. 587-588.

20. Brandon, Last Americans, pp. 3-4.

21. Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 32.

22. Ibid.

23. Note that Indians never claimed to own the land. They controlled its use by
humans but this is different front the Western concept of owning the land. The
Indian viewpoint upon first meeting the white man was that owning the land was
a terrible shocking conceit of man.

24. R. Douglas Hurt, Indian Agriculture in America: Prehistory to the Present (Law-
rence: Univ. Press of Kansas, 1987), p. 229.

25. Linn, “Corn,” p. 59.

26. Edwin F. Walker, World Crops Derived from the Indians, 1953, 17: 2.

27. Hurt, Indian Agriculture, pp. 228-229.

28. Ibid., p. 24.

29. Ibid., p.226.

30. Walker, World.

31. Robert E. Rhoades, "The Incredible Potato,” National Geographic, May 1982,
pp. 668, 676.

32. Noel D. Vietmeyer, “America’s Forgotten Crops,” National Geographic, May
1981, pp. 704-708.

33. Patrick J. Munson, ed.. Experiments and Observations of Aboriginal Wild Plant
Utilization in Eastern North America, Prehistory Research Series (Indianapolis: Indi¬
ana Historical Society, 1984), 6: 459-462.

34. Jack Weatherford, Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the
World (New York: Crown Publishers, 1988), p. 76.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Notes / 527

35. Imre Sutton, ed., Irredeemable America: The Indians’ Estate and Land Claims,
Native American Studies (Univ. of New Mexico, 1985), pp. 4-5.

36. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 335.

37. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 337.

38. Wilson, Underground, p. 120.

39. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 357.

40. Webb, Great Frontier, p. 373.

41. Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 32.

42. Brandon, Last Americans, p. 7.

43. Lewis H. Morgan, Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family
(Oosterhout: Anthropological Publ., 1970), pp. 292-382.

44. Brandon, Last Americans, p. 5.

45. Grinde, Founding of the American Nation, p. IX.

46. Josephy, Indian Heritage, p. 35.

47. Brandon, New Worlds, pp. no-in.

48. Gibson, American Indian, p. 581.

49. Grinde, Founding of the American Nation, p. 130.

50. Ibid., pp. 60-61.

51. Howard M. Bahr, Bruce A. Chadurich, and Robert C. Day, eds.. Native Ameri¬
cans Today: Sociological Perspectives (New York: Harper & Row, 1972), p. 67.

52. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1961.

53. Originally the Osages used small tortoise shells with panther (mountain
lion) teeth in them where bells are used today. Trade with Euro-Americans brought
the metal bells of today, but the symbolism of the turtle and panther remains (the
voices of the turtle and panther are still heard).

54. Hagan, Indian in American History, p. n.

55. Brandon, New Worlds, p. 76.

56. Harold E. Fey and D'Arcy McNickle, Indians and other Americans: Two Ways of
Life Meet (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1959), p. 13.

57. Jose Ortega Y Gasset, Concord and Liberty (New York: WW Norton, 1963)^.
47 -

58. Labadie, Osage Case, pp. 39-41.

59. Bloodworth, Osage People, p. 34.

60. Thomas M. Brewer, Maj. Gen. Clarence Tinker: A Photographic Tribute (Okla¬
homa City: Office of History), Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air
Force Base, 1986.

61. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (New York: Vintage Books, 1954),
vol. i,p. 359m

62. Peterson, New Peoples, p. 4.

63. Many Osage parents do not report their children to the agency. Hence, the
total Osage population is regularly under-reported. The most reliable estimates clus¬
ter around a population of 18,000 in 2002.

64. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on Indian Affairs,
Hearing on H. Con. Res. 108, 83rd Cong., 1st sess., 22 July 1953, pp. 28-29.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

528 / Notes

65. Donald L. Parman, “The Indian and the Civilian Conservation Corps,”
Pacific Historical Review, 40 (February 1971): 45.

66. Sutton, Irredeemable, p. 35.

67. John L. Taylor, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Present Re¬
lations of the Federal Government to the American Indian, 84th Cong., 2nd sess., January
1958, PP- 44 - 65 -

68. Paul M. Niebell to D. E. Martin, March 6, 1970. This is the first announce¬
ment the Council had confirming the claims settlement compromise.

69. Kenneth R. Philp, “Termination: A Legacy of the Indian New Deal,” West¬
ern Historical Quarterly, 14 (April 1983): 180.

70. Osage Indian, pp. 77-81.

71. Bahr, Chadurich, and Day, Native Americans, p. 68.

72. Labadie, Osage Case, pp. 15-16.

73. Osage Indian, pp. 17-18.

74. Henry F. Dobyns, Native American Historical Demography: A Critical Bibliography
(Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1976), p. 1.

75. Tyler, History, p. 235.

76. Gibson, American Indian, p. 587.

77. Nancy Shoemaker, “Urban Indians and Ethnic Choices: American Indian
Organizations in Minneapolis, 1920-1950,” Western Historical Quarterly, 19 (Novem¬
ber 1988): 446.

78. William T. Hagan, “Full Blood, Mixed Blood, Generic, and Ersatz, The Prob¬
lem of Indian Identity,” Arizona and the West 27 (Winter 1985): 326.

79. Maud Blackbird Cheshewalla, our dear friend and resource person, was mur¬
dered with her husband in February of 1989.

80. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Subcommittee of the Committee on
Indian Affairs, Survey of Conditions of the Indians in the United States: Hearings on S.
Res. yg, 78th. Cong., 1st. Sess., Part 41, 2 and 3 August 1943, pp. 23026-23027.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography

BOOKS

Agogino, George A. “Man’s Antiquity in the Western Hemisphere.” In The American
Indian Reader, edited by Jeannette Henry. Series in Educational Perspectives i.
San Francisco: Indian Historian Press, 1972.

Agogino, George A., and Michael L. Kunz, “The Paleo Indians: Fact and Theory of
Early Migrations to the New World." In The American Indian Reader, edited by
Jeanette Henry. Series in Educational Perspectives 1. San Francisco: Indian His¬
torian Press, 1972.

Andreas, A. T. History of the State of Kansas. 1883. Reprint, Chicago: A. T. Andreas,
1976.

Andrist, Ralph K. The Long Death: The Last Days of the Plains Indians. New York:
Macmillan, 1964.

Bahr, Howard M., Bruce A. Chadurich, and Robert C. Day, eds. Native Americans
Today: Sociological Perspectives. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.

Bailey, Thomas A. A Diplomatic History of the American People. New York: F. S. Crofts
and Co., 1947.

Baird, W David. The Osage People. Phoenix: Indian Tribal Series, 1972.

Barney, Ralph A. Laws Relating to Osage Tribe of Indians. Pawhuska, Okla.: Osage
Printery, 1929.

Baughman, Robert W Kansas Post Offices. Topeka: Kansas State Historical Society,
1961.

Beals, Ralph L., and Harry Hoijer. An Introduction to Anthropology. New York: Mac¬
millan, 1965.

Bearss, Edwin C., and AJrrell] M.[organ] Gibson. Fort Smith: Little Gibraltar on the
Arkansas. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1969.

Black, Henry Campbell. Black’s Law Dictionary. St. Paul: West Publishing, 1951.

Bradley, John Hodgdon. World Geography. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1951.

Brandon, William. The Last Americans. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974.

-. New Worlds for Old: Reports from the New World and Their Effect on the Devel¬
opment of Social Thought in Europe, 1500-1800. Athens: Ohio Univ. Press, 1986.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

530 / Bibliography

Burns, Louis Francis. “Jim Town: Elgin, Kansas.” The History of Chautauqua County,
Kansas. Dallas: Curtis Media, 1987.

-, ed. The Osage Annuity Rolls of 1878. 6 vols. Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga Press,

1980-81.

-. Osage Indian Bands and Clans. Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga Press, 1984.

-. Osage Indian Customs and Myths. Fallbrook, Calif.: Ciga Press, 1984.

-, ed. Osage Mission Baptisms, Marriages, and Interments, 1820-1886. Fallbrook,

Calif.: Ciga Press, 1986.

-, ed. Treaties Constitution and Laws of the Osage Nation. 1895. Reprint, Santa

Ana: Private Printing, 1967, reprint of W S. Fitzpatrick, 1895.

-. Turn of the Wheel. San Marcos, Calif.: A. M. Graphics, 1980.

Carstens, Kenneth C., and Patty Jo Watson. Of Caves and Shell Mounds. Tuscaloosa:
Univ. of Alabama Press, 1996.

Catlin, George. Letters, Notes on Manners, Customs, and Conditions of the North Ameri¬
can Indians. Vol. 2. New York: Dover Publications, 1973.

Cervantes, Miguel de. Don Quixote de la Mancha. Edited by Robert M. Hutchins.
Great Books of the Western World, vol. 29. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952.

Chapman, Carl H. "The Indomitable Osage in Spanish Illinois, 1763-1804.” In The
Spanish in the Mississippi Valley, 1762-1804, edited by John Francis McDermott.
Chicago: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1974.

-. The Origin of the Osage Indian Tribe. New York: Garland, 1974.

Chitwood, Oliver Perry, and Frank Lawrence Owsley. A Short History of the Ameri¬
can People. New York: D. Van Nostrand and Company, 1946.

Cranor, Ruby. Caney Valley Ghost Towns and Settlements. Bartlesville, Okla.: Black¬
man, 1985.

Custer, George A. My Life on the Plains. Edited by M. M. Quaife. Chicago: Lakeside
Press, 1952.

Cutler, Jervis. A Topographical Description of the State of Ohio, Indiana Territory, and
Louisiana. 1812. Reprint, New York: Garland, 1975.

Diaz-Granados, Carol, and James R. Duncan. The Petroglyphs and Petrographs of Mis¬
souri. Tuscaloosa: Univ. of Alabama Press, 2000.

Dick, Everett. Vanguards of the Frontier. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1941.

Din, Gilbert C., and Abraham P. Nasatir. The Imperial Osages. Norman: Univ. of
Oklahoma Press, 1983.

Dobyns, Henry F. Native American Historical Demography: A Critical Bibliography.
Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1976.

Fey, Harold E., and D'Arcy McNickle. Indians and Other Americans: Two Ways of Life
Meet. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1959.

Finney, Frank F. Wahshouwahgaley Pioneer Days with the Osage Indians West of ’96.
Private Printing, 1972.

Fitzgerald, Mary Paul, Sister. Beacon on the Plain. 1939. Reprint, St. Paul: Osage Mis¬
sion Historical Society, 1985.

Foreman, Grant. Advancing the Frontier, 1830-1860. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma
Press, 1961.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography / 531

-. Indians and Pioneers. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1967.

Gates, Paul Wallace. Fifty Million Acres: Conflicts over Kansas Land Policy, 1854-1890.
New York: Atherton Press, 1966.

Gibson, Arrell Morgan. The American Indian: Prehistory to the Present. Lexington,
Mass.: Heath and Co., 1980.

-, ed. Between Two Worlds: The Survival of Twentieth Century Indians. Oklahoma

Historical Society, 1986.

Graves, WW The Broken Treaty. St. Paul: Journal Publisher, 1935.

-. The First Protestant Osage Missions 1820-1857. Oswego, Kans.: Carpenter

Press, 1949.

-. History of Neosho County. Vol. 1. 1949. Reprint, Osage Mission Historical

Society, 1986.

-. Life and Letters of Father Ponziglione. St. Paul, Kans.: W W Graves, 1916.

-. 1916 citing. Osage Mission Journal, April, 1884.

Grinde, Donald A. Jr. The Iroquois and the Founding of the American Nation . San Fran¬
cisco: Indian Historian Press, 1977.

Hagan, William T. The Indian in American History. American Historical Association,
1963. Reprint, Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1968.

Hassrick, Royal B. The George Catlin Book of American Indians. New York: Promon¬
tory Press, 1977.

The History of Chauauqua County, Kansas. Dallas: Curtis Media, 1987.

Holder, Preston. The Hoe and the Horse on the Plains. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska
Press, 1970.

Horsman, Reginald. “American Indian Policy and the Origins of Manifest Destiny."
In The Indian in American History, edited by Francis Paul Prucha. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1971.

Houck, Louis. A History of Missouri. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times,
reprint 1971.

Huntington, Ellsworth. Civilization and Climate. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1924.

-. Mainsprings of Civilization. New York: Mentor Books, 1945.

-. Principles of Human Geography. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1947.

-. “The Red Man's Continent." In The Chronicles of America Series, edited by

Allen Johnson. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1919.

Hurt, R. Douglas. Indian Agriculture in America: Prehistory to the Present. Lawrence:
Univ. Press of Kansas, 1987.

Ingenthron, Elmo. Indians of the Ozark Plateau. Point Lookout, Mo.: School of the
Ozarks Press, 1981.

Irving, Washington. A Tour on the Prairies. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1962.

Isely, Bliss, and W M. Richards. Four Centuries in Kansas. Topeka: State of Kansas,
1944.

Jackson, Donald, ed. Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition with Related Documents,
1785-1854. 2nd. ed. 2 vols. Chicago: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1978.

Jennings, Francis. The Invasion of America. New York: W W Norton, 1975.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

532 / Bibliography

Josephy, Alvin M., Jr. The Indian Heritage of America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1968.

Kappler, Charles J. Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties. 2 vols. Washington: GPO, 1904.
Lamb, Arthur H. Tragedies of the Osage Hills. Pawhuska, Okla.: Osage Printery, ca.
1930.

Loomis, Noel M., and Abraham P. Nasatir. Pedro Vial and the Roads to Santa Fe. Nor¬
man: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1967.

Mathews, J. Joseph. Life and Death of an Oilman. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,

1985-

-. The Osages: Children of the Middle Waters. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press,

1961.

-. Talking to the Moon. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1945.

-. Wah'Kon-Tah. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1932.

McDermott, John Francis, ed. Tixier’s Travels on the Osage Prairies. Norman: Univ. of
Oklahoma Press, 1968.

-, ed. A Tour on the Prairies, by Washington Irving. Norman: Univ. of Okla¬
homa Press, 1962.

McNickle D’Arcy. “American Indians Who Never Were.” In The American Indian
Reader, edited by Jeannette Henry. Series in Educational Perspectives 1. San Fran¬
cisco: Indian Historian Press, 1972.

Miller, William J. An Introduction to Physical Geology. New York: D. Van Nostrand,

1956.

Miner, H. Craig, and William E. Unrau. The End of Indian Kansas. Lawrence: Re¬
gents Press of Kansas, 1978.

Montesquieu, Charles de. “The Spirit of Laws.” In Great Books of the Western World,
edited by R. M. Hutchins. Vol. 38. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952.
Morgan, Lewis H. Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family. Oos-
terhout: Anthropological Publ., 1970.

Morris, John W, Charles R. Goins, and Edwin C. McReynolds. Historical Atlas of
Oklahoma. 3rd ed. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1986.

Munson, Patrick J., ed. Experiments and Observations of Aboriginal Wild Plant Utiliza¬
tion in Eastern North America. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society, 1984, 6:
459-462.

Nasatir, Abraham P. Before Lewis and Clark. 2 vols. St. Louis: St. Louis Historical
Documents Foundation, 1952 (author’s proof copy).

-. Borderland in Retreat. Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico, 1976.

Newman, Tillie Karns. The Black Dog Trail. Boston: Christopher Publishing House,
1957 -

Nichols, David A. Lincoln and the Indians: Civil War Policies and Politics. Columbia:
Univ. of Missouri Press, 1978.

Nuttall, Thomas. A Journal of Travels into Arkansas Territory During the Year 1819. Ed¬
ited by Savoie Lottenville. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1980.

Ortega y Gasset, Jose. Concord and Liberty. New York: W W Norton, 1963.

-. Man and Crisis. New York: W W Norton, 1962.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography / 533

-. Meditations on Quixote. Edited by Julian Marias. New York: W W Norton,

1963.

Osage County Profiles. Oklahoma City: Bare and Curtis, 1978.

Osgood, Ernest Staples, ed. The Field Notes of Captain William Clark, 1803-1805.
New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1964.

Peterson, Jacqueline, and Jennifer S. H. Brown. The New Peoples: Being and Becoming
Metis in North America. Winnipeg: Univ. of Manitoba Press, 1985.

Prentis, Noble L. A History of Kansas. Topeka: Caroline Prentis, 1909.

Prucha, Francis Paul, ed. Documents of United States Indian Policy. Lincoln: Univ. of
Nebraska Press, 1975.

Ruth, Kent, et al. Oklahoma: A Guide to the Sooner State. Norman: Univ. of Okla¬
homa Press, 1958.

Sanders, J. G. Who’s Who Among Oklahoma Indians. Oklahoma City:Trave Company,
1928.

Spaulding, George F., ed. “Count Albert-Alexandre de Pourtales.” In On the Western
Tour with Washington Irving. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1968.

Starr, Isidore, Lewis Paul Todd, and Merle Curti, eds. Living American Documents.

New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961.

Sutton, Imre, ed. Irredeemable America: The Indian Estate and Land Claims. Native
American Studies. Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico, 1985.

Terrell, John T. American Indian Almanac. New York: World, 1971.

-. Sioux Trail. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974.

Thompson, J. Eric S. Maya Archaeologist. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1971.
Tinker, Sylvester J. Authentic Osage Indian Roll Book. Pawhuska, Okla.: Sam McClain,
1957 -

Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. Vol. 1. New York: Vintage Books, 1954.
Vanderwerth, W C., ed. Indian Oratory. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1979.
Vestal, Stanley. The Missouri. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1967.

Wallis, Michael. Oil Man. New York: Doubleday, 1988.

Weatherford, Jack. Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World.
New York: Crown, 1988.

Webb, Walter Prescott. The Great Frontier. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1952.

Wilson, Terry P. The Underground Reservation: Osage Oil. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska
Press, 1985.

Worcester, Philip G. A Textbook of Geomorphology. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1949.
Yost, Nellie Snyder. Medicine Lodge: The Story of a Kansas Frontier Town. Chicago:
Swallow Press, 1970.

PERIODICAL ARTICLES

Allen, Peter S. Review of The Ancient Americans. Archaeology 42 (January/Febru¬
ary, 1989): 94-95-

Bearss, Edwin C. “In Quest of Peace on the Indian Border: The Establishment of
Fort Smith.” Arkansas Historical Quarterly 23 (Summer 1964).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

534 / Bibliography

Berry, Brewton, and Carl Chapman. “An Oneota Site in Missouri.” American Antiq¬
uity i (March 1942): 1-11.

Berry Brewton, Carl Chapman, and John Mack. “Archaeological Remains of the
Osage.” American Antiquity 10 (July 1944): 1-11.

Bieder, Robert E. “Scientific Attitudes Toward Indian Mixed-Bloods in Early Nine¬
teenth Century America !’Journal of Ethnic Studies 8 (Summer 1980).

Brandon, William. “American Indians and History.” American West 2 (Spring 1965).

Burns, Louis Francis. “Osage History.” Osage Nation News, February-April, 1986.

Burrill, Robert M. “The Establishment of Ranching on the Osage Reservation.”
Geographic Review 62 (October 1972).

Chapman, Berlin B. "Removal of the Osages from Kansas.” Kansas Historical Quar¬
terly 7 (August/November 1938).

Dodge City Times, 25 January 1879.

Englund, Donald R. “Indians, Intruders, and the Federal Government.” Journal of the
West 13 (April 1974).

Franklin, Benjamin. “Remarks Concerning the Indians of North America.” Real
West, January 1975.

Gabler, Ina. “Lovely’s Purchase and Lovely County.” Arkansas Historical Quarterly 19
(Spring i960).

Hagan, William T. “Full Blood, Mixed Blood, Generic, and Ersatz: The Problem of
Indian Identity.” Arizona and the West 27 (Winter 1985).

Hansen, Klaus J. “The Millennium, the West, and Race in the Antebellum American
Mind.” Western Historical Quarterly 3 (October 1972).

Hrdlicka, Ales. “The Bearing of Physical Anthropology on the Problems Under
Consideration: The Problems of the Unity or Plurality and the Probable Place
of Origin of the American Aborigines.” American Anthropologist 14, n.s. (January-
March 1912).

Isern, Thomas D. “Farmers, Ranchers, and Stockmen of the Flint Hills.” Western
Historical Quarterly 16 (July 1985).

Linn, Alan. “Corn, the New World’s Secret Weapon and the Builder of its Civiliza¬
tions.” Smithsonian, August 1973.

MacNeish, Richard S. “The Origin of New World Civilization.” Scientific American,
November 1964.

Montagu, M. F. Ashley, “An Indian Tradition Relating to the Mastodon.” American
Anthropoligist 46, n.s. (October-December, 1944): 568-591.

Morris, Wayne. “Traders and Factories on the Arkansas Frontier, 1805-1822.” Arkan¬
sas Historical Quarterly 28 (Spring 1969).

“The Native American: A Changing Perspective.” American West, July 1973.

Parman, Donald L. “The Indian and the Civilian Conservation Corps.” Pacific His¬
torical Review 40 (February 1971).

Philp, Kenneth R. "Termination: A Legacy of the Indian New Deal.” Western His¬
torical Quarterly 14 (April 1983).

Rhoades, Robert E. “The Incredible Potato.” National Geographic, May 1982.

Rohrerjohn H. “The Test Intelligence of Osage Indians.” Journal of Social Psychology
16 (August 1942).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography / 535

Ryan, Harold W, ed. “Jacob Bright s Journal of a Trip to the Osage Indians.” Journal
of Southern History 15 (November 1949).

Shepherd, William G. “Lo the Rich Indian.” Harper’s Magazine, November 1920.

Shoemaker, Nancy. “Urban Indians and Ethnic Choices: American Indian Organi¬
zations in Minneapolis, 1920-1950.” Western Historical Quarterly 19 (November
1988).

“Silver Lake Early Trade Center.” Oklahoma Rural News, October, 1978.

Tate, Michael L. “From Scout to Doughboy: The National Debate over Integrating
American Indians into the Military, 1891-1918.” Western Historical Quarterly 17
(October 1986).

Tinker, George “Edward,” and C. J. Phillips, eds. “Massacre of Confederate Officers
by Osages.” Osage Magazine, February 1910.

Vietmeyer, Noel D. “America’s Forgotten Crops.” National Geographic, May 1981.

Washburn, Wilcomb. "The Writing of American History: A Status Report.” Pacific
Historical Review 40 (August 1971).

Wheat, Joe Ben. “A Paleo-Indian Bison Kill.” Scientific American, January 1967.

Zoltvany, Yves F. “New France and the West, 1701-1713.” Canadian Historical Review
46 (December 1965): 317-319.

PUBLICATIONS OF LEARNED ORGANIZATIONS

Abel, Annie Heloise. “The History of Events Resulting in Indian Consolidation
West of the Mississippi River.” Annual Report of the American Historical Association
for 1906. Vol. 1.

-. “Indian Reservations in Kansas and the Extinguishment of their Title.” Col¬
lections, Kansas State Historical Society, 1903-1904.

-. “Proposals for an Indian State. 1778-1878.” Annual Report of the American

Historical Association for 190-3. Vol. 1.

Ashcraft, Allan C. “Confederate Indian Department Conditions in August, 1864.”
Chronicles of Oklahoma 41 (Autumn 1963).

Bartles, William Lewis. “Massacre of Confederates by Osage Indians in 1863.”
Transactions of the Kansas State Historical Society, 1903-1904. Vol. 8.

Burchardt, “Osage Oil.” Chronicles of Oklahoma 41 (Fall 1963).

Busby, Orel, “Buffalo Valley: An Osage Hunting Ground.” Chronicles of Oklahoma 40
(Spring 1962).

Chapman, Berlin B. “Dissolution of the Osage Reservation.” Chronicles of Oklahoma
20 (September 1942).

Chappell, Philip Edward. “River Navigation: A History of the Missouri River.”
Transactions of the Kansas State Historical Society, 1903-1906. Vol. 9.

Christianson, James R. “The Kansas-Osage Border War of 1874.” Chronicles of Okla¬
homa 63 (Fall 1985).

Connelley, William E. “The Treaty Held at Medicine Lodge.” Collections, Kansas
State Historical Society, 1926-1928. Vol. 17.

Cory, C. E. “The Osage Ceded Lands.” Transactions of the Kansas State Historical So¬
ciety, 1903-1904. Vol. 8.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

536 / Bibliography

Douglas, Richard L. “History of Manufactures in Kansas.” Collections, Kansas State
Historical Society, 1909-1910.

Finney, Frank F. “The Osages and their Agency During the Term of Isaac T. Gibson
Quaker Agent.” Chronicles of Oklahoma 36 (Winter 1958-59).

Finney, Frank F., Sr. “Progress in the Civilization of the Osage and Their Govern¬
ment.” Chronicles of Oklahoma 40 (Spring 1962).

Hoig, Stan. “War for Survival.” Chronicles of Oklahoma 62 (Fall 1984).

Kinnaird, Lawrence, ed. “Spain in the Mississippi Valley. 1763-1794.” In three parts,
vols. 2, 3, and 4. Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1943-

La. Flesche, Francis. A Dictionary of the Osage Language. Bureau of American Eth¬
nology. Bulletin 109.

Lockhart, Donald. “Early History of Elk Falls." Collections, Kansas State Historical
Society, 1928.

Mallery, Garrick. “Pictographs of the North American Indians.” Fourth Annual Re¬
port. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology, 1882-1883.

Martin, George W “The Boundary Lines of Kansas.” Collections, Kansas State His¬
torical Society, 1909-1910.

McGee, W J. “The Siouan Indians: A Preliminary Sketch.” citing J. Owen Dorsey,
13th Annual Report. Bureau of American Ethnology. Smithsonian Institution.

Mead, James R. “The Little Arkansas.” Transactions of the Kansas State Historical So¬
ciety, 1903-1908, edited by George W Martin. Vol. 10.

-. "The Wichita Indians in Kansas.” Transactions of the Kansas State Historical

Society, 1903-1904. Vol. 8.

Mooney, James. “Calendar History of the Kiowa Indians,” Seventeenth Annual Re¬
port. Bureau of American Ethnology. Smithsonian, 1895-1896.

Morrison, T. F. "The Osage Treaty of 1865.” Collections, Kansas State Historical So¬
ciety, 1926-1928. Vol. 17.

“Official Kansas Roster: United States Indian Agencies Affecting Kansas.” Collec¬
tions, Kansas State Historical Society, 1923-1925.

Paxson, Frederic L. “The Pacific Railroad and the Disappearance of the Frontier in
America.” Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 190-3. Vol. 1.

Pease, T. C., ed. “The French Foundations, 1680-1693.” Collections, Illinois State His¬
torical Library, French Series. Vol. 1.

Royce, C. C., and C. Thomas. “Indian Land Policy of the United States.” 18th An¬
nual Report. Bureau of American Ethnology. Smithsonian, 1896-97.

Semple, Ellen Churchill. “Geographical Location as a Factor in History.” Annual
Report of the American Historical Association for 1903.

Sibley, George C. “Extracts from the Diary of Major Sibley.” Chronicles of Oklahoma
5 (June 1927).

S wanton, John R. The Indian Tribes of North America. Bureau of American Ethnology.
Bulletin 145, 1952.

Tracey, Valerie. “The Indian in Transition: The Neosho Agency 1850-1861.” Chron¬
icles of Oklahoma 48 (Summer 1970).

Wilker, Edwin F. World Crops Derived from the Indians. 1953. Vol. 17 (Los Angeles:
Southwest Museum Leaflets).

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography / 537

Wedel, Waldo R. An Introduction to Kansas Archeology. Smithsonian Institution. Bu¬
reau of American Ethnology. Bulletin 174, 1959.

-. “Prehistory and the Missouri Valley Development Program.” Smithsonian

Miscellaneous Collections. Vol. 3. 1948.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

Brief and Argument on Right of Osage Allottees and Purchasers—Mineral Trust,
Tulsa, Osage Oil and Gas Lessees Association, December, 1920.

Burns, Louis Francis, ed. “The Elgin Brand Register, 1887-1907.” Kansas State His¬
torical Society, Oklahoma City, 1981.

Drew, Mary Lou. Letter. 2 July 1985.

Graves, WW 1916, citing Sedan [Kansas] Times-Star, 23 April 1896.

Justification Brief and Argument of the Osage Tribal Council for Extension of the
Osage Mineral Trust Period, November 18, 1963, Exhibit III.

Labadie, George V Osage Case for Federal Supervision. 15 February 1954 (Tribal Coun¬
cil Information Booklet).

Leahy, T. J. Brief and Argument on Right of Osage Allotees and Purchasers-Mineral
Trust. Tulsa, Osage Oil and Gas Lessees Association, December, 1920.

Memorandum from Scott Keep to Field Solicitor, Pawhuska, dated September 27,
1979, Copy to Regional Solicitor, Tulsa.

Niebell, Paul M. Letter to D. E. Martin. 6 March 1970.

Osage Council Information Letter. Development of the Osage Reservation and
Summary of Special Laws Governing the Osage Tribe.

Parsons, David. “The Removal of the Osages from Kansas.” Ph.D diss., Univ. of
Oklahoma, 1940.

Proposal of Fifteen Oil Companies to Council, 5 August 1947, Waterflood.

Statement and Argument by the Osage Tribal Council on Behalf of the Osage Tribe
of Indians in Support of Legislation to Extend the Osage Mineral Trust, ca. 1931.

Statement and Argument by the Osage Tribal Council on Behalf of the Osage Tribe
of Indians in Support of Legislation to Extend the Osage Mineral Trust [first
renewal].

Statement of Facts, In the Matter of Claim of Kingsbery and Holmsley for Relief,
On Account of the Wrongful Appropriation by the Osage Nation of Indians of
238 Head of Cattle Belonging to said Kingsbery and Holmsley, in the Years

1874-5-

Thorne, Tanis. “People of the River: Mixed-Blood Families on the Lower Mis¬
souri.” Ph.D. diss., Univ. of California, 1987.

GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS AND REPORTS

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1873.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1875.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1876.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1884.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

538 / Bibliography

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1886.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1888.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1890.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1891.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1895.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1908.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1921.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1924.

Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1961.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 1898.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Vol. 1, 1899.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1900.

Annual Reports, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Vol. 1, 1901.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1904.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, Part 1, 1909.

Annual Report, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, 1906.

Brewer, Thomas M. “Maj. Gen. Clarence L. Tinker: A Photographic Tribute.” Okla¬
homa City: Office of History, Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air
Force Base, 1986.

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indians of the Central Plains. N.d.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Osage People and Their Trust Property, a Field Report of
the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Field Report prepared by Jessie Bloodworth. Osage
Agency, Anadarko Area Office, 30 April 1953.

Federal Archives and Records Center, Fort Worth, Texas. Region 7. Records of the
Osage Agency. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Record Group 75). Records 195-197.
Gibson, Isaac T., “To Enoch Hoag, September, 1873,” Report of the Commissioner,
i873-

Miles, Laban J. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1879.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1880.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1882.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1884.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1889.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1890.

-. Annual Report, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1891.

Morgan, T. J., Fifty-Eighth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs,
1889.

Opening of Rolls, Senate Hearing on Joint Resolution No. 70, March 1908.
Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1856, Letters No. 44 and 45.

Tyler, Lyman S. A History of Indian Policy. United States Department of the Interior.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1973.

United States. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Indian Affairs. American Indi¬
ans and the Federal Government. N.d.

U.S. House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on Indian
Affairs, Hearing on H. Con. Res. 108, 83rd Cong., 1st sess., 22 July 1953, p. 15.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Bibliography / 539

U.S. House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Present Relations of the Federal
Government to the American Indian: Hearings, 84th Cong., 2nd sess., January 1958.
U.S. Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Senate Subcommittee, Osage
Indian Tribe of Oklahoma: Hearing on H. Con. Res. 108, Serial No. 7, 83rd. Cong.,
1st sess., 22 July 1953.

U.S. Senate Documents on Peyote, S.R. 1399, Part 1, 8 February 1937.

U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Subcommittee, Survey of Conditions of the
Indians in the United States: Hearings on S. Res. 79, 78th. Cong., 1st. sess., 2 and 3
August 1943.

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index

abandonment clause, 404
Abel, Anna, 175,296
abolition movement, 248
accommodation, 482
Acker Creek, 82
Adair, William P., 311, 351
adaptation, 205, 493
Adena, 4, 21

adoption, 89, 214, 245, 397
adornments, 209
Agency District, 352
agency grass leases, 387
agency reserves, 403
agents, 227
Agrarian Revolt, 461
Agrarian Revolution, 203
agriculture: cultures, concept of land
ownership, 87; as Euro-American
food procurement source, 92; Indian
contributions to, 449, 450-53; as
supplementary source of food for
Osages, 91; teaching to Osages, 235-
36. See also farming
Agriculture and Mechanical (A & M)
College Land Grant Act, 292
Ah ke tali Tun ka (Big Soldier), 212-13
Ah ke ta Ki he ka (Chief Protectors), 18,
40, 316

Ah ke ta Ki he ka (Soldier Chief), 337
Ah le Pa se Shu tsy (Red Hill Top), 81, 83
Alabaster Caverns State Park, 81, 83

Alaska Purchase Treaty of 1867, 306
Albany Plan of Union, 449, 461
Albuquerque School, 282
alcohol, 366
Algonquian, 16, 21
Allen, Oklahoma, 68
Allen County, Kansas, 52
allotment, concept of individual, 256
allotment, Osage, 481; acreage passed
into the hands of white men or other
Indians, 410; areas withheld from allot¬
ment, 403-5; domain in common,
407-10; end of large-scale grass leas¬
ing, 388; forced, 320; and intruders,
364; method of allotting, 405-7; and
mixed-bloods, 326; opposition to, 38,
400-402; presence of “locaters” on
the reservation, 407; pressure for, 387,
401; separation of surface ownership
from mineral ownership, 400-401;
and surplus lands, 388; survey issue,
402-3

Allotment Act of 1906: amendment mak¬
ing all Osages U.S. citizens, 412-13;
background for, 407-8; drafted by
BIA-created Osage government, 394,
405; minerals council, 408-10; setting
aside of distinction based on parents'
gender, 399; term of the mineral
trust, 425

Allotment Commission, 406, 407

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

542 / Index

aloofness, 464-65, 490
Alva, Oklahoma, 81, 83
amaranth plant, 453
American Board of Commissioners for
Foreign Missions, 219, 395-96
American dream, 468
American Historical Association, 25
American history, perception and reality
of American Indian, 445-50
American Indian Peyote Church,

363, 496

American Indians. See Indians
American Revolution, 38, 113, 145,

459, 460

Americans. See Euro-Americans
Ancient Society (Morgan), 458
Andreas,A.T.,58
Andrist, Ralph K., 280
animal power, 468, 494
animals, 29
anise, 453

annuity payments, 165, 242, 359, 423; of
1873, 312; of 1878, 177, 346
Annuity Rolls: division between full-
bloods and mixed-bloods over, 400;
dropping a person front, 398; estab¬
lishing, 395-400; greed of all persons
associated with establishing, 398,431;
inaccuracy of, 242; qualifications,
398-400; residence qualification, 399
Apache of the Plains (Lipan Apache), 28,
34, 109, no, 132
Appalachians, 149
apron dams, 475
Arapahoes, 277, 350
archaeology, 483
Archaic Age, 4, 9
Arickaree Creek, 278
Arikaree, 144

Arkansas bands: Bear and Panther clans
among, 117, 125; Claremore and
Black Dog clans among, 67; defense
of their territory and rights, 191;
move to lower reaches of Neosho-

Grand river, 133; population, 243; re¬
moval to Kansas, 165; response to in¬
truders, 157; splintering, 125; trouble
with Cherokee “Old Settlers" over
hunting rights, 154. See also Clare-
more bands
Arkansas City, 75

Arkansas Post, 45, 74, 106, 117-18, 127
Arkansas River, 5, 74, 77, 79, 80, 84
Arkansas River Mississippians, 10
Arkansas Treaty, 155, 156
Arkansas Valley, 28
Armstrong, William, 214
arrow stories, 20

Articles of Confederation, 149-51,

197, 201

assimilation, 205, 462, 463, 469, 474
Astorians, 325

Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway
Company, 404

Atlantic Tidewater region, 70
atonement, 262

automobile, and growing demand for
petroleum and its products, 417
avocados, 452

Babson, Roger Ward, 29,499n4
Bad Bird, 60

La Balafre (The Scar), 121
balance of trade, 94
Bancroft collection, 131
band chiefs, 390; empowered by consent
of governed, 41; growth in power
during Spanish period, 130; last leader¬
ship position to be abandoned, 487
band villages, 43
baptisms, 496
Barber County, Kansas, 62
barium, 29

Barnard-Chapman Ranch, 389
Barnsdall, T. N. (Big Heart), 352, 404, 421
Bartlesville, Oklahoma, 79, 84, 335
Bartram, William, 143
Bass Hole, 69

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 543

Battle of Arickaree Creek, 277-78
Battle of Claremore’s Mound, 67, 119,
194-95

Battle of Duquesne, 101
Battle of New Orleans, 100
Battle of the Washita, 63, 276, 278-80
Bax, John J., 54, 205, 213, 235
Baxter Springs, Kansas, 49, 77, 369
Baxter Springs cattle trail, 77
Beacon on the Plain (Fitzgerald), 208,

253, 260
beans, 453

Bear clan, 41, 117, 125

Beaver, John, 279

Beaver Creek, 82

Beavers Town, 56, 60

Beede, Cyrus, 357, 358

beef industry. See cattle industry

beek, 368

Belle Oiseau (Pretty Bird), 60-61, 64

Bend of the Missouri, 7, 48, 96

Bennett, Joseph, 346

Benton, Thomas Hart, 174

Berry, Brewton, 7

Beyett, Alexander, 305, 329, 337

Beyette, Pierre, 213

Bienvineu, Sam, 337

Big Bone River, 46, 47

Big Caney, 318

Big Cedar village, 51, 61, 66

Big Chief, 261

Big Creek, 60

Big Earth Maker, 66

Big Elk (O pon Tun ka), 13-14, 301

Big Foot. See Tracks Far Away

Bigheart, Wooster, 329

Big Heart (Barnsdall), 404, 421

Big Hill Creek, 61, 263

Big Hill Joe, 55

Big Hills (Big Bone Osages), 41; and
Gray-Horse Fairfax, 352; and removal
council, 318, 319; Upland Forest, 61;
White Hair, 61
Big House of Mysteries, 15

Big Osages, 7; Claremore bands, 63; close
relationship with Quapaw, 44; en¬
trance to Missouri, 72; hunting
camps, 62; Osage River, 116;

Pomme de Terre River, 11
Big Shrine, 498^5
Big Track. See Tracks Far Away 11
Big Wild Cat, 63, 278
Bird Creek, 77, 80, 235, 333, 336
Bird Creek District, 352
birth order names, 326
birthrate, 234, 244, 245, 327
Black Bear Creek, 84
Black Bear (Radiant Star) clan: arrow
story, 20, 21; and Big House of Mys¬
teries, 15; custodian of the four sym¬
bolic knives, 20; resistance of Spanish
and Americans on Arkansas River, 17;
version of genesis, 14
Blackburn, Oklahoma, 84
Black Dog band: en route camps, 69;
hunting camps, 62; independence, 63-
64; joining with Claremore bands, 51;
Pomme de Terre band, 11; population,
243; saved from attack on Claremore,
67; settlement in Kansas, 46, 49
Black Dog Crossing, 69
Black Dog I (Dark/Black Eagle), 49, 51,
59, 61, 185; on Allotment Commis¬
sion, 406; band chief, 50on2o; chief
counselor to Claremore, 64; death and
burial, 67; isolation of people from
epidemics, 67, 4971114; three great
engineering feats, 66
Black Dog II, 51-52, 64, 261
Black Dog Museum, 49
Black Dog’s Town (Tally’s Town), 61
Black Dog the Younger, 319
Black Dog Trail (second Osage buffalo
trail), 49, 66, 69, 71, 75, 77, 82
Black Gold, 417
black gold, 417
Black Kettle, 35, 63, 276
Black Kettle village, 279

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

544 / Index

black paint, 32, 34
Black Robes, 228

blacksmith and striker provisions, Treaty
of 1839, 165
black widow spider, 13
blanket Indians, 357, 358, 359
blood quantum, 395, 396, 399, 483
blood ties, 40
blue, pale, 9

bluestem grass, 24, 28-29, 336, 369
Blue Stem Lake, 430
Bluff City, Kansas, 62
Bluff Creek, 62
bluff paint, 32

Bluff War, 32-33, 34, 89, 96, 426
Board of Commissioners Missionaries, 348
Board of Indian Commissioners, 313
body painting, 209
Boheme (vagabond-outcast), 105, 134
Boiling Springs State Park, Oklahoma,
83-84

Bois de Arc Creek, 80, 82
Bonaparte, Napoleon, 132
bone marrow, 211
“boom hypothesis," 445-46
Boonby, Dodridge (Barnady), 329
botany, contributions to by Indians, 449
Boudinot, Cornelius, 311
Boudinot Mission, 58, 219, 220, 221
Boulanger, Oklahoma, 334
Boulanger-Bowring area, 352
Boulanger Cemetery, 334
boundary line, between Kansas and
Oklahoma, 330-31
Bourbon County, Kansas, 75
Bourgmont, Entienne Veniard, 37, 96-97
bow, 19

bow and arrow, superior to firearms in
Indian War, 126-27
Bowring, Oklahoma, 339
bow wood, 92

Bradbury, John: Travels, 54, 208
Braddock, Edward, 72, 99, 100, 121
Bradford, William, 446

Brandon, William, 446, 448
brass, 244

brass kettles, 216-17
breech clouts, 209
Briar’s Town, 60, 279
Bridget, Sister, 230
Bright, Jacob, 201

British: active among the Northeastern
nations, 182-83; colonialism, 94; In¬
dian proposal, 181; means to impose
their overlordship, 90; trapping in Old
Northwest, 114

Bro Ki he fea/Brucaiguais (Chief to All),
107-8

Brown, Anna, 440, 441
Brown, John, 250
Bruyere, Fabry de la, 97
Bryce, James, 445
buckbrush, 453
Buck Creek, 77
buckeye, 453
Buckmaster, John, 333
buffalo: and bluestem grass, 29; killed by
Osage in hunts between 1865 and
1870, 319; passing of, 361-63; south¬
ern herd, 24, 62

Buffalo Bull clan (Lo ha), 16,116,

499n36

buffalo camps. See hunting camps
buffalo fat, 211

buffalo hunts: fall hunt of 1870-71, 345,
346; fall hunt of 1876, 358; long
hunts of 1870-1875, 351-52; spring
and fall, 43; spring hunt, prolonged,
318-19

buffalo short ribs, 211
buffalo trails: First, 32, 75; Fourth, 79;
in Oklahoma, 78; Second (See Black
Dog Trail); Third, 77
buffalo tribes, 5o6ni8
buffer zone, between the Euro-Americans
and Osages, 161, 163
Burbank pool, 420, 421, 422, 423-24
Burchardt, Bill, 206, 401, 439-40

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 545

Bureau of American Ethnology, 12
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA): as “big
brother,” 392-93; bypassing of Con¬
gressional land policies, 305; creation
of, 198; creation of council to draft
Allotment Act, 408; description of
Osages, 205; forcing of Osages work
for rations bought with their own
money, 351; mismanagement of In¬
dian estates, 481; outrage at economic
independence of Osages, 359; politi¬
cal power, 258-59; preference given
to Euro-Americans, 347; prevention
of total extinction of the Osage
people, 199; representation of own
interest in the Osage town sites, 405;
requirement of intruders on new re¬
serve to pay a rental fee to the Osage
people, 334; restrictive policies de¬
signed to make farmers out of Osage,
372-73; schools, 248; “slush fund,”
282; suspension of Osage govern¬
ment, 393-95, 407; veto power of,

152; War Department attempts to
reclaim, 331

burial practices, 496, 498^4
Burkhart, Ernest, 441, 442
Burlington Crossing, 75
Burrell, Robert M., 371, 385, 388
Bushnell, Horace, 274
Butler County, Kansas, 74
Butterfield Route (Ox-Bow Route), 248

Cabin Creek, 68
Caddoean Pawnee, 6
Caddos: breaking of 1785 peace agree¬
ment with Osages, 111; captured for
slave trade, 98; expansion of other
peoples into territory of, 28; food
trade with Osage, 92; location to im¬
mediate west of the Osage Empire,
28; loss of territory to Osage, 32-33,
34; massacre at Claremore's Mound,
194-95; northern, 6; Osage defeat and

demoralization of, 113, 115; Recon¬
struction Council, 267; as sedentary
farmers, 28; sheltered by Osage dur¬
ing Civil War, 266; in Spiro Mound
area,5

Cahokia, n, 48, 95, 96
Caigues Tuajanga, 107
calcite, 29

Caldwell, Kansas, 62
calendar, Osage, 210-11, 50oni5
Calhoun, John C., 160, 193
California gold rush, 326, 401
California Trail, 75
Calloway, R. A., 165, 226
calumet, 10
calumet pipes, 60
Camp Holmes, 217
camp reserves, withheld from allot¬
ment, 403
Camp Supply, 279
Canadian River, 68, 74, 77, 79
Caney, Kansas, 82
Caney River, 69, 77, 79, 82
Caney River Valley, 335
Canteen Creek, 115
Canville, A. B., 334
Canville Cemetery, 334
Canville’s Post, 284
Canville Treaty of 1865, 52, 236, 287;
Civilization Treaty, 282-85; commu¬
nication problems, 284; school lands
omission in, 285; unratified treaty of
1863, 281

Cape Girardeau, 35
Cape St. Anthony, 72
Captain, Augustus “Ogeese,” 261, 337
captives, 214-15
Carlisle School, 282
Carondelet, Francisco Hector, 109, 123,
124, 126, 127, 128, 129
cascara sagrada, 450
Cashesegra. See Tracks Far Away I
Casquins. See Kaskaskias
cast-iron cookware, 244

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

546 / Index

Catholic Church, relationship with
Osages, 226, 235, 495-96
Catholic missionaries, 226
Catlin, George, 205-6
catlinite (red pipestone), 60, 91
cattail, 453

cattle industry: Osage role in develop¬
ment, 370, 388; problem of distance
between source and demand, 368-69
Caya, 11

Cedar Springs, 63
Cedar Vale, Kansas, 77
cemetery gifts, 404
Cemetery Reserve, 403
Central Plains, 24
ceremonial club, 19
ceremonial knife, 19
ceremonial songs, 15
certificate of competency, 405
Cervantes, Miguel de: Don Quixote de la
Mancha, 103, 505111
cession. See land cession
change, and Osage survival: abrupt, 486;
and constancy, 469-70; evidence of,
490-91; nature of. 486-88; recogni¬
tion of, 489-92
Chanute, Kansas, 52
Chapman, Carl H., 7, 21, 104. 401
Chautauqua County, Kansas, 77, 82
Cherokee Commission, pressure on
Osages to Allot, 401
Cherokee Neutral Lands, 51, 163
Cherokee Outlet, 85, 160-61; map of,
162; opening of to homesteading,
369, 370; value of, 342-44
Cherokees: acquisition of Neosho and
Verdigris valleys at expense of the
Osages, 158-59; and Battle of Clare-
more’s Mound, 67, 194-95; carrying
of epidemics to Osage, 238; cholera,
239; claims against Euro-Americans,
157; greed, 339; and hunting on
Plains, 5061118; intrusions into Osage
territory, 158, 191; move to Arkansas,

191; “New Settlers,” 154; objection to
price of Osage New Reserve, 343-
44; “Old Settlers,” 154; opposition to
the Indian state, 174; Osage view to¬
ward, 401; patent of 1838, 342; re¬
moval, 189, 191, 314; Spanish policy
and, 114; trail herd tax, 370
Cherokee Strip, 160, i6i;map of, 162
Cherokee Tobacco Case, 297-99, 298
Cherokee Treaty of 1866, 321, 336, 341,
342, 343

Cherokee Treaty of 1868, 342
cherts, 29

Chesapeake Piedmont—Blue Ridge
area, 3, 22, 43

Cheshewalla, Maud Blackbird, 484
Chetoka (Tsi To Ka), 101
Chetopa, Kansas, 81
Chetopa /Che To pa (Tsi To pa, or Four
Lodges), 34, 52, 215, 301, 305, 319, 337
Chetopa Creek, 52
Chewere Sioux, 3, 4, 6, 43-44
Cheyenne: Battle of the Washita, 279-80;
and the horse, 28; "jumped” reserva¬
tion, 63; loss of territory to Osages,

35; at Medicine Lodge Council, 277;
and Osage hunters, 69; Sand Creek
Massacre, 276; Southern, 34, 35; to¬
bacco trade, 109; "War,” 321
Cheyenne Autumn, 351
Cheyenne Creek, 79
Chickasaws, 67, 114, 129
child marriage, 360, 361
Chippewas, 429
Chisholm Trail, 349, 369, 371
Chivington, J. M., 276
Choctaw-Chickasaw reserve, 190
Choctaws, 67, 114, 194-95
cholera epidemic, 239, 240
Chouteau, Auguste P., 51, 128, 129, 139,
140, 156, 191, 337
Chouteau, Gesso, 261, 329
Chouteau, Louis J., 261, 338
Chouteau, Peter, 329

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 547

Chouteau, Pierre, 142, 144, 154, 155, 191
Chouteau, Sophia Captain (Woman
Chief), 279, 325, 443
Chouteau-Revoir (Revard) post, 68
Chouteau's Western Division, American
Fur Company, 58
Chovin/Chavin, Santiago, 109
Christianity, 219, 495
Cimarron River, 74, 79, 81
cinchona bark, 450

citizenship: by common soil, 397, 411;
by jus sanguine (by blood), 411; for
mixed-bloods, 329-30; for Osages
in Allotment Act of 1906, 412-13;
Osages problem of, 411, 432-33
Civilian Conservation Corps, Indian
Division, 475

Civilization Act of 1820, 219
Civilization Fund, 163, 282-86, 301, 305,
323,401,476
civil rights, 412

Civil War: Confederate Osages, 260-61;
Confederate Treaty, 261-63; disastrous
effects on Osages, 225, 236, 489, 491;
effect on cattle industry, 368; and
Euro-American views of the Indian,
198, 233-55; Indian influence in,
258-59; Osages in Union forces, 263;
Osage thwarting of Confederate
officers, 263-64; raids on Osages
during, 236; refugee Indians in
Osage territory, 264-67; service
rendered to Union by Osages, 259-
60, 264

“claims game," 50, 157, 164, 259, 286, 482
claims settlement, Osages, 168, 286, 475-
77, 482

Claremore, Oklahoma, 61
Claremore bands (People of the Oaks),

50; Big Hills, 263; climate zone, 24;
Earth Chief, 42; majority of the Big
Osages, 63; and removal council, 319;
request for schools, 218-19; villages
of in Oklahoma, 30, 63

Claremore I (Arrow Going Home), 53,
55,59, 64, 128

Claremore III (Town Maker II), 66, 84
Claremore II (Town Maker), 11, 30, 42-
43, 53, 64, 125, 130, 160, 201-2, 218
Claremore s Mound, 61, 66
Claremore’s Village, 61,66-67
Claremore villages, 60-61
Clark, George Rogers, 127
Clark, William, 146, 168, 193
Clarke, Sidney, 293, 306-7
Claymore Creek, 61
clays, 29

cleansing rites, 498034
Clear Creek, 80

climate: defined, 23; role in the rise and
fall of the Osage people, 23-25, 492
Clinton, Missouri, 74
closed tillage, 468
Clovis culture, 3
club, 19
coal, 29, 407
coal oil, 417
coastal cultures, 70
coco, 450

“code talkers,” 471
coercive removal, 180
Coffey County, Kansas, 52
Coffeyville, Kansas, 79, 82, 84
Cogisiguedes, 108
Cohen, Felix, 460

colonial powers, acceptance of right to
claim and attach American lands, 90
colonization, of Indians, 172
Comanche: carrying of epidemics to
Osages, 238, 240; fighting with
Osages, 34, 35, 109, 122; and the
horse, 28; massacre at Claremore’s
Mound, 67, 194-95; at Medicine
Lodge Council, 277; and the Span¬
ish, no

Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 229;
creation of, 198; Indian policy, 91; on
Osage grazing leases, 375; payment to

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

548 / Index

Van and Adair, 313; work for the rail¬
road, 302

Committee of Twelve, 302
common soil argument, of Osage citi¬
zenship, 397
communism, 458

compaction, effects on Osages, 225, 227,
233-34, 237-38

compulsory free education, 247-48
Concordia, Mother, 230
Confederacy, and Osages, 260-61
Confederate Indian Department, 234
Confederate Indians, 265
Confederate Osages, 260-61
Confederate-Osage Treaty of 1851,261-
63 , 295

constitutional government: crisis in, 392-
94; need for reestablishment, 410; sus¬
pension of by Bureau of Indian Af¬
fairs, 393-94, 407; two attempts at,
390-92; two forces working against
first attempt, 390

Constitution of 1881, 262, 360, 391, 392,
394, 399

constructive change, 486
Contact period, peak in the margin of
survival, 488

Continental Congress, 149
continental cultures, 70
Continental Oil Company (Conoco), 421
Continental Trail (Virginia Warrior
Path), 35, 46, 50; alternate, 32, 33,

75, 77; branches, 76; in Kansas, 74; in
Missouri, 72; Osage denial of use to
Euro-Americans, 27
cooking, 207
cookware, 244
Copan, Oklahoma, 79
copper, 244
copper poison, 216

corn (maize), 452; crop, 318-19; culture,

6; and land tenure, 450-51
Coronado, 30, 75, 95
corporate governmental form, 484

Cory, C. E., 297
cosmopolitanism, 27
Cote Sans Dessein, 325
cotton, 450

Council Grove, Kansas, 75
Council Grove Treaty, 160, 164-65, 295
Council of Ah ke tas, 54, 55, 130, 315, 316
counterclockwise dancing, 465
counting coup, 213
Coureurs de bois (Runner of the For¬
est), 105

Coushattas, 194-95
Cowley, Kansas, 317
Cowlitz Prairie, 325
Craig, Captain, 332
Crawfish clan, 66
Crawford, Samuel J., 309, 313
Crawford, T. Hartley, 214
Crawford, Wade, 477
crayfish, 66
credit, 434-35
Creeks, 266

crimes, against Osages, 438-39
Cro-Magnon Man, 483
Crozat, Antonine, 98
Cruzat, Francisco, 108, 114, 121, 181, 182
crystalline quartz, 29
Cucici-nica’s band, 60
Cudahy Oil Company, 418
cultural blending, 472-73
cultural borrowing and rejection, 493-94
cultural ethnocentrism, 164, 218, 274
cultural exposure, 492-93
culture, Osages: attraction to ranching,
227, 369-71; aversion to agriculture,
227; awe of symbolic articles, 129-30;
calendar, 210-11; ceremonies, 321-22;
cultural contrasts with Western civili¬
zation, 87-89; cultural persistence,

205; descriptions, 205-6; dress, 209-
10; food, 211-12; good water, 202;
marriage and divorce, 210; obsession
with a long life, 9; opposition to in¬
truders, 88-89; physical feats, 206-8;

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 549

religion, 89, 208-9, 487, 495; sense of
humor and flair for the dramatic, 359;
special traits, 464-66; sun prayers, 8-
9; views, 212-14
curare, 450
Curtis, Charles, 338
Curtis Act, 341

Custer, George A., 35,63, 276, 278,
279-80

cyclonic storms, 492

Dakota Sioux, 6, 7, 21, 144
dancing, 465

Dark (Black) Eagle. See Black Dog
(Dark/Black Eagle)

Dark (Black) Eagle (prayer eagle), 208
datura, 450

Dawes Act (General Allotment Act of
1887), 383-85; defined the right of
nonresident mixed-bloods to allot¬
ment, 397; inapplicability to Osages,
341; inclusion of Osages in citizen¬
ship provisions, 412
dawn prayers, 498n2i
Dean, Charles W, 241
Dearborn, Henry, 140, 142, 144
death rate, of full-bloods vs. mixed-
bloods, 327
death sentence, 262
de Bellrive, Louis St. Ange, 101
de Blanc, Louis, 122, 123
de Breuil, Jacobo, 107, 114
decapitation, 89-90, 173, 216
Declaration of Independence, 276
Deep Ford, 80, 336
Deer clan, 15
Defoe, Daniel, 457
De La Croix, Charles, 160, 228
Delano, Columbus, 338
Delaware, 67, 123, 172, 194-95, 266
Delawares, 189

de Lemos, Manuel Gayoso, 128

Deliette, Sieur, 10

Delino, Ignacio, 123, 124, 125

De Maillet, Francis, 228

De Meyer, Peter, 228

De Mun, Jules, 54

Denton, John, 250

Department of Indian Affairs, 198

Department of the Interior, 198, 234

Desert Cultures, 9, 75

De Smet, Peter John, 213, 228, 235

de Soto expedition, 4, 7, 11, 95

De Voto, Bernard, 446

Dexter, Kansas, 62

Dhegiha, 6, 7, 43-44

diamonds, 29

diet, 327, 491

Diminished Reserve, 163, 289, 293, 302,
321; intruders, 308, 309-11
dipping, 371, 385
direct barter, 93
direct democracy, 461
Director of the Hunt, 18
discrimination: against African Ameri¬
cans, 462; against mixed-bloods by
full-bloods, 328
disenfranchisement, 412
Division Chiefs: formal limitations and
checks on, 41; lodges of, 42; passing
away of, 315, 391; threat of constitu¬
tional government to, 390
divorce, 210, 360, 361, 437
Doby Springs, 81
dogs, 451, 494

domestic animals, 92-93, 451, 494-95
Donelson settlement, 333-34
Dorn, Andrew J., 198-99, 233, 234, 236,
241,260, 261, 262, 361
Dorsey, J. Owen, 3, 22
Douglas, Stephen A., 238, 250
Down Under Little Osages, 41, 48, 49
draft notices, 471

Dragoon Expedition of 1833-1834, 217

drinking, 213

drought, 239

Drum Creek, 61

Drum Creek Council, 301, 303

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

550 / Index

Drum Creek Treaty (Osage Treaty) of
1868, 293-94, 2 95; background of,

300- 301; cause of trouble for Osages
after defeat, 311; chicanery, 287-88,
302-3; Civilization Fund error, 284;
grants for Kansas schools, 304; last ne¬
gotiated treaty, 151; negotiation of,

301- 3; opposition in the House of
Representatives, 305-7; Osage inter¬
ests ignored by opposition to, 306-7;
Osage opposition to, 301, 304-5; pro¬
test against, 278, 283

Dry Continental climate, 23-24
Dry Plume, 261, 301, 321, 337
Du Bourg, Louis W. V, 228
Ducharme, Jean Marie, 106
Dull Knife, 278
Dunlap, Robert, 160
Duquesne (Forks of the Ohio), 72
du Tisne, Charles Claude, 95, 97

Eagle Chief Creek (Hu lah Ki he ka Ka
ha), 81, 84
Ea hoh ka, 337
early contact period, 490
Earth Chief (Hun ka), 42
Earth Division, 116, 316
Earth Grand Divisions, 17
earthquakes, 44, 506m 2
east, as direction of life, 70
East Shawnee Trail, 369
East Tennessee Historical Society Bulle¬
tin, 131

Eastwood, Elijah and Abraham, 192
Eatsataneka, Jack, 329
economic imperialism, 90
economics, Indian contributions to, 453-55
economic theory, and the frontier, 455
economy, 91-95; based on hunting and a
limited agriculture, 9-10, 28, 87; ef¬
fects of the trade in hunt products,

94; lack of concept of money, 158;
problems caused by too much money,
442-44. See also income

education: beginnings of formal, 218—

19; biased account of the American
Indian in textbooks, 483; “Indian
schools," 282-83; mission schools,
219-20; modern, hampered by low
income and remoteness, 483; re¬
form, 247

education fund. See Civilization Fund

Elder Wa sha she clan, 21

Elet,John Anthony, 228

Elgin, Kansas, 69, 77, 82, 330-31, 371

elk, 66

Elk clan, 66

Elk County, Kansas, 74

Elk River, 74

elk's forehead, 13, 14

Elktown, 55

Ellsworth, Henry Leavitt, 213
Elm Creek, 77

E Ion schscah (Playground of the Eldest
Son), 465

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 248
emigrant Indians: on former Osage do¬
main in Kansas, 188; on former Osage
domain in Missouri, 187; on former
Osage domain in Oklahoma, 190;
of the Northeast and old Northwest
and their respective populations in
1829, 184; from the Northeastern
nations, 186
enclosure laws, 87, 388
encomiendo system, 102-3
The End of Indian Kansas, And Then There
Were None (Miner and Unrau), 344
English. See British
Enid, Oklahoma, 84
Ennisville, 332
enslavement, of Indians, 102
En Ta pu Pshe (Teach to Grind Corn
with Stone), 47
environment, 449
ephedra, 450

epidemics, 230; Black Dog's coping with,
67, 497ni4; caused by closer associa-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 551

tion with Euro-Americans, 165;
compaction policy as cause of, 225,
233-34, 237-39; early, 239-40; and
population, 7, 242; of the 1850s, 240-
42, 489

equipment farmer, 286
erosion control dams, 475
Es ad da ua, 350
E spa lo (Spaniard), 113
Estis, Seraphine, 156
ethnocentrism, 164, 218, 274
Eureka, Kansas, 29

Euro-Americans: approach to the Osages
vs. that of the Spanish, 142; concept
of the strong-leader government, 273;
consistent underestimation of Indian
populations, 242; convenient fiction
of right of occupancy of Indian
lands, 200; fear of Osage attack, 144-
45; land hunger of, 94-95; Osage fore¬
knowledge of, 95; views of the In¬
dian, 253-55, 272-73. See also Indian
policy; Osages, and Euro-Americans
“exploring with the mind,” 463-64
extermination, 102
external sovereignty, 147, 152, 200

face paint, 32, 34, 35

Fairfax, Oklahoma, 77, 80, 404

Fall, Albert, 420

Fallen Timbers, 133,184

Fall River, 74

Falls Creek, 82

family grass leases, 387, 388

famine, 225, 239

farming: glorifying of, 255; methods,
451-52; missions, 68; as a solution to
the Indian problem, 255-56
Fawcell, Max, 330, 331
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and
Osage murder cases, 441
federal trading factory system, 152, 153,
160, 225, 295
feeder trails, 71

fee simple ownership, 342, 346, 385
fencing, 369
fencing laws, 381
Fenlon Decision, 383
Ferdinandia, 33-34, 62, 75, 77
fertilization, 88
Fey, Harold E., 470
filter dams, 475
“finger talk," 32
Finney, Frank Sr., 345, 357, 392
firearms, role played by in Indian Wars,
126-27

Fire Prairie Treaty, 144, 145, 154, 155
First Buffalo Trail, 32, 75
Fish clan, 15
Fitz-Gerald, John, 329
Fitzgerald, Sister Mary Paul, 55, 59, 240,
251, 253, 260

Five Civilized Tribes, 157,174, 338,

401, 465

Flathead Tribe, 429

fletching, 100

flint, 19, 20, 29

Flint Hills, 24, 28, 289, 389

flood legends, 44, 498^3

Florer, John N., 403, 419

Folsom culture, 3

food, in Osage culture, 211-12

food crops, 450

food poisoning, 92

food supply: decrease in due to land ces¬
sions, 491; Osage sources of, 91; and
presence or absence of domestic ani¬
mals, 494; role of land in, 87
food trade, 92
Foraker, 404

Foreman, Grant, 191, 239

Forest Grove School, Oregon, 282

Forked Horn, 301

Forsythe, Colonel, 277

Fort Arbuckle, 68

Fort Carondelet, 127-31

Fort Clark. See Fort Osage

Fort Des Chartres, 101

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

552 / Index

Fort Dodge Reserve, 289-90

Fort Duquesne, 96, 99

Fort Gibson, 50, 64, 75, 158, 193, 205, 217

Fort Humboldt, 263

Fort Leavenworth, 50, 75

Fort Niagara, 99, 101

Fort Orleans, 96

Fort Osage, 48, 74; closing of, 225, 295;
establishment of in Treaty of 1808,

141, 152, 153, 166; federal factory
at, 160

Fort Scott, 75
Fort Sill, 216

Fort Smith, 50, 75, 158, 267

Fort Stevenson School, North Dakota, 283

Foster, Edwin Bragg, 418, 419

Foster, Henry Vernon, 418-19, 419-20, 421

Foster leases, 378, 418-19

Fountain of Youth, 457

Four Horsemen, 509^4

Four Mile Creek, 74, 221

fourteen fireplace organization, 14

Fourth Buffalo Trail, 79

Four Winds (Breath of Life) symbol, 7-8

Fox, 47, 48, 96, 122, 123, 144

France, Anatole, 273, 459

franchisement, 412

Francis, John Jr., 331

Franklin, Benjamin, 149, 247, 449

Franquelin, Jean-Baptiste-Louis, 47

Frantz, Frank, 404-5

fraternity, 459-60

Freedman School, 282, 283

free hunting, 72

free passage, 173

free-soilers, 250, 251

free-soil territory, 248

free trappers, 92

French: cession of all of Louisiana to
Spain, 101; colonialism, 94; forts, 99;
fur traders, 105, 325; means to impose
overlordship, 90; Red River expedi¬
tion, 97; voluntary removal efforts, 175
French and Indian War (Seven Years War),
33-34, 99-iQi, 148, 149

French-Osages, 402, 473
French Prairie, Oregon, 325
French Revolution, 459
Friend, Peter and August, 192
frontier: and economic theory, 455; Great
American, 85; literary themes, 457;
thesis, 447; two coexisting, 448
frontier line, 173

Front Range, Rocky Mountains, 24
fry bread, 211

full-blood Osages: birth- and death-rate,
327; decline in, 175, 337; discrimina¬
tion against mixed-bloods, 328; moti¬
vated by enlightened self-interest in
allotment issue, 401; opposition to al¬
lotment, 386; passing of tribal power
to mixed-bloods, 328; suffering after
passing of buffalo, 363; two types of,
175-76

fun, in Osage life in the 1920s, 435-37
funeral customs, 350
fur trade, 104-7; assignment of traders,
1794-1795, 108; competition for the
Osage trade, 107-9; credit, 434; and
depletion of Osage supply of game,
94; Missouri River, 1775-1776, 105;
role in defeat of Protestant missionar¬
ies, 225; value of, 106-7
fur traders: encouragement of Osages to
live by the hunt, 227; French, 105, 325

Gabler, Ina, 159
Gadsden Purchase, 248
Garland, A. H., 385
gas wells, 422
Gate, Oklahoma, 81
Gates, John P., 156, 286
gathering activities, 91
Gemonds Town, 61
generosity, of Osages, 464
genesis story, 12-14, 64
Genoa School, 283

gentile system, 39-42; in 1861, 390; ap¬
plication to all people, 39; clans and
subclans, 40; executive branch, 40; or-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 553

ganization, 487; rule against marriage
within a clan or its subdivisions, 40;
split in divisions, 128; weakening of,
125, 132, 487
geographic setting, 23-30
George III, 148, 276
George White Hair, 58, 59
George White Hair IV, 54-55
George White Hair’s Village, 58
Georgia Compact of 1802, 177
Getty, George and Jean Paul, 421
Ghost Dance, 363
Gibson, Arrell Morgan, 445
Gibson, Isaac T., 301, 309, 313; appoint¬
ment of Star Chief as Governor of
all Osages, 55; determination to make
farmers of the Osages, 335; division
of new reservation into five districts,
352; efforts to protect Osages from
Vann and Adair, 348; enthusiasm
about progress of Osages toward his
idea of “civilization,” 352-53; erec¬
tion of schools, churches, barns, mills,
blacksmith shops, and agency houses,
348, 352; fight for Osage rights, 199,
348; grass lease arrangement, 349; in¬
tent to destroy two tribal chieftain¬
ships, 315-16; introduction of new
tribal organization, 391; investigation
of, 348-49; leading of Osage to Silver
Lake, 345; love/hate relationship with
Osages, 315; on Osage population in
1873, 346; on Osage profit from cattle
drives, 370; and price issue of New
Reserve, 343; relationship with Osage
people, 335-37; and removal act, 317,
318, 339 ; replacement as Agent, 357;
report of 1875, 350; report on the
first Osage delegation to Lawrence,
Kansas, 349-50

gift giving, after the Removal Council,
322-23

gifts, withheld from allotment, 403-4
Gillstrap’s crossing, 318
Gilmore, Samuel, 251

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 469

gold, 93, 94, 258

Golden Age, 9

Golden Triangle, 29

gold rush, 326, 401

good road, 202

Goodskin, John, 443, 444

good water, 202

Gospel of Individualism, 246, 248
government, of Osages, 17-19; changes
in over history, 487-88, 491; chart
showing mergers and organization of,
5; interim, 394-95; internal politics,
386-88; and natural rights, 38; rela¬
tionship with United States, 392;
reorganization of military govern¬
ment, 130; superiority to those of
Western civilization, 148; three
groups of bands, 42; trait of caring
for its people, 41. See also constitu¬
tional government; gentile system
Governor Joe (Star Chief), 228; appoint¬
ment by Gibson, 55, 315-16; fourth
Hunka chief, 56; and intruder settlers,
134; and New Reserve, 337, 339-40;
and Removal Council, 318, 320; and
Vann-Adair affair, 312
Governor Joe s Village, 61
gradual change, 486-88
gradual emancipation, 248
Grady County, Oklahoma, 69
graft, 259

Graham, Richard, 160
Gra Moie (Arrow Going Home) (Clare-
more I), 53, 55, 59, 64, 128
Grand Buffalo Hunts, 18,43, 62, 238-39,
499n39

Grand Council, 320

Grand Division Chiefs, 17-18, 39,42,

130,487

Grand Divisions, 40
Grand Earth Division Chief, 43, 487
Grand Him ka Chieftainship, 11, 55-56;
loss of power during Spanish period,
130; shift to the Arkansas bands, 128

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

554 / Index

Grand Osage Prairies, 24, 289, 389
Grand Piste (Big Track), 55-56
Grand River, 50on26
Grand Tsi shu Chief, 17, 18, 42, 125, 130
Grand War Party, 15, 17, 130
Grange Movement, 290
Grant, Ulysses, 336, 343
grass, bluestem, 24, 28-29, 336, 369
grass leasing, 372, 374-83; agency, 387;
change in due to conflict over con¬
trol of Osage government, 387; de¬
cline of, 378-83; early, 349; family,
387, 388; growth of, 375-77; by in¬
dependent ranchers, 381; individual,
452; leases of 1898, 376; leases of
1900, 377; leases of 1901, 378, 379;
leases of 1904, 380, 381; leases of
1905, 382; only Osages could legally
enter into, 385; renewal, 374-74; as
source of Osage income, 358
Gratiot, Sieur, 116

Gra to Me Shin ka (Little Hawk Woman),
82, 331

Gra to Me Shin ka U su (Little Hawk
Womans Grove), 69, 82
Gra to Moh se (Iron Hawk), 54, 55
Graves.W W,5i,58
Gray County, Kansas, 74
Gray Horse, 403
Gray Horse-Fairfax, 352
Gray’s Point, 72
grazing, 371-73
Great American Desert, 271
Great American Frontier, 85
Great Depression, 433, 474-75
Great Plains, 272, 289
Great Salt Plains, 29, 34
greed: absence of for material things
among Osages, 485; of Cherokees,
339; in establishment of Osage roll,
398,431; for honors among Osages,
130, 506ml
Greenville Treaty, 181
Gregg, Josiah, 208

Grema’s Town, 61

Griffin, Victor, 363

Griffith, Edwin, 241

Grinde, Donald, 458

Grosse Cote (Big Hill) band, 41, 46

Grosse Cote (Big Hill Town), 66, 243

gross production tax, 427, 429

Grouse Creek, 62, 75

guardianship larceny, 437-38

Guardians of One’s Word, 12

guayle, 453

Gulf, Colorado, and Santa Fe Rail-
way, 370

Gus Strike Axe, 69, 337, 339, 345
gypsum, 29

Haiti, 132

Hale, William K., 441,442
Hall, Agent, 410
Halley’s Bluff, 49, 129
Hamilton, Alexander, 127
Hamlet (Shakespeare), 225-26
Hampton School, 282, 283
Hancock, W S., 276
Hancock War, 276
Ha pa Shu tsy (Red Corn), 228, 251,
5161136
happiness, 460

Hard Rope, 263-64; and Confederate
Treaty, 261; and Drum Creek Treaty,
301, 305; Medicine Lodge, 351; and
New Reserve committee, 337; scout
for Custer, 35, 278-79
hardwood forests, 23
Harmer, Josiah, 183
Harmony Mission, 164, 219, 220, 221
Harmony Mission Journal, 51
Harrington, M. R., 364
Harrison, Benjamin, 384
Harry Koh pay, 406
Harvey, Thomas H., 229
Haskell Institute, Lawrence, Kansas, 283
Hatch Act of 1887, 292
Hawk Wa ho pe (Hawk Shrine), 16

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index /

555

Hay Town (Pa she To wan), 309

Heart Stays Little Osages, 10,40, 48, 352,

498n23

Heart Stays Trail, 79, 80, 81-83, 83

Heart Stays Village (Little Town), 58

Helena, Oklahoma, 84

Henry, Patrick, 149

Henry Roan Horse, 440-41

Herard, Eugene “Gene,” 279

Herard, Paul, 69

Hewins, Edwin “Ed,” 374, 375

Hickory Creek, 74

Hickory Station, 345

hides, 94

highest-use argument, 87, 468
highland trail, 73
Hispaniola (Haiti and Santo Do¬
mingo), 479

Hoag, Enoch, 313, 319, 320, 338
Ho e ka (snares), 13, 14
Holdenville, Oklahoma, 68
Holmes, 273
homeland, 454

Home Owners Association, 426
Homestead and Preemption Act of 1862,
258, 286, 292
homesteading, 384, 387
homestead selections, 405, 406
Hominy, 84, 403, 404
Hominy District, 352
honors: chief making through, 130; greed
for among Osages, 506ml; titles of,
5201116

Hooke, Moses, 142
Hoots, Rosa, 417

Hopefield Missions, 67-68, 219, 220-21

Hopewell, 4

Hopewellian mounds, 6

Hopewellian pottery, 6

“horse bow” 92

Horse Chief, 261

Horse Creek, 81

horsemanship, 207

horses: advent of, 486; changes related to,

490; earliest Osage term for, 4981133;
and expansion of mountain peoples,
28; Osage attraction to, 106; tech¬
nology, 95

Ho ta Moie (Conies Roaring) (“John
Stink"), 241

Ho tse He Ka he (Cedar Tree Creek), 83
Ho tse He Pa se (Cedar Tree Hills), 81
Houck, Louis, 11, 54
House in the Middle, 42
House of Mysteries, 15, 16
House of Peaceful Ceremonies, 15
Howard University, 283
Howland, George, 339
Hulah Dam, 334, 345, 430
Hn lah Ki he ka Ka ha (Eagle Chief
Creek), 81, 84
Hn lah Tsah, 337

Humid Continental climate: effects on
activity of peoples, 25; location of all
main Osage villages, 24
Humid Subtropical climate, 23, 24
humor, 213, 436, 456
Hun ka Ah hu tun (Hun ka, Having
Wings), 13

Hun ka (Earth Chief), 42
Hun ka (Earth/Night People) clan, 6, n,
14, 52; in the Confederation, 15, 16;
knives, 20; warfare as a solution to
problems, 21

Hun ka Grand Division, 17
Hun ka (Sacred One), 86
hunting: and food supply, 91; identical to
warfare in Osage mind, 18; Indian vs.
European, 467; organized, 72. See also
buffalo hunts

hunting camps: in Kansas, 61-63; in Mis¬
souri, 45-49; in Oklahoma, 68-69
hunting cultures, 173; and communal
ownership of land, 87; destruction
of all, 91; nomadic tendency, 176
hunting rights, 154
Huntington, Ellsworth, 253
hunt products, demand for, 94

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

556 / Index

Ice Age hunters, 9
ice dam, 44

ideal communities, 246-47
identification cards, 411
illegal leasing, 383, 384
Illinois, 10-11, 11, 96, 123
Illinois district, Osage trade monopoly
in, 116

Illinois Hopewellians, 4
Illinois River, 74, 77
Illinois River trail, 77
imperialism, 90, 94, 392-93
income, Osages, 358-59, 433-35; desper¬
ate need for annuities from the sale
of the 1865 ceded and trust lands,

283; during the 1880s and up to
1906, 358

indentured servitude, 495
Independence, Kansas, 61, 79, 309
Indian Affairs, Laws and Treaties (Kap-
pler), 403

Indian Appropriation Act of 1870, 310-
11, 30

Indian Appropriation Bill of 1871, 151,
299, 307

Indian Appropriation Bill of 1880, 324
Indian Citizenship Act, 412
Indian Claims Commission, 475, 482
Indian Cultural Center, Wichita, Kansas, 62
Indian-Knoll culture, 3
Indian land policies, 89-91, 199-201
Indian Nations, location of in 1903, 112
Indian policy, 198-205; casting of Osages
in the role of villains, 191; centralized
treaty-making, 149; and citizenship,

411 —13; clustering of villages near
Agencies, 225, 233, 237; contempo¬
rary, 481; contempt of officials to¬
ward Indians, 274; corruption, 347;
cultural policy, 201-5; dependent on
enforcement of treaty provisions, 256;
dominated by corporate interests after
1850, 201; elements of, 199; end of

treaty-making, 292, 299, 307; evolu¬
tion of attitudes toward the Indian,
273; four solutions that evolved from,
174; goal of removing all Indians
from Kansas, 314; government-issued
“rations,” 347; "Indian Problem,”

173; Indian Reconstruction, 267-68;
lack of uniformity, 143; land policies,
89-91, 199-201; money involved in,
258; and Osage minerals council, 409;
removal, 135, 175-85, 189-95; segrega¬
tion concept, 149; Supreme Court
power to interpret the Constitution,
298; task force on, 462; threat of
Osage termination, 477-79; view
of Indians as an impediment, 204;

War Department near destruction
of Osage people, 198, 199. See also
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)

Indians: concept of harmony with all,
195-97; contradictory relationship
with BIA, 481; culture, 466-68; de¬
fense of lands forced colonists to
unite for mutual defense, 449; deroga¬
tory terms used against, 273; as differ¬
ent minority, 462-63; diversity of,
480-81; divided by different views
of the slavery issue, 265; effect on eco¬
nomic institutions formed between
1500 and 1900, 446; factionalization
under Euro-American influence, 196,
446; and Great Depression, 474-75;
histories, 203; independently devel¬
oped civilization, 448; influence on
every Euro-American event up to
1890, 175; lack of written language,
202; and the land, 467-68; perception
and reality of in American history,
445-50; political action, 481; popula¬
tion, 175, 204; resistance to change,
468-70; restructuring of political or¬
ganization, 273; superiority of gov¬
ernments to those of Western civiliza-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 557

tion, 148; traits, 463-64; unification,
failure of, 119-20; wars on the plains,
276-80

“Indian Scare of 1875,” 63
Indian state: origin of idea, 172; Osages
dream of, 174, 268, 316, 401
Indian Territory, creation, 174, 186-87
Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Com¬
pany (ITIO), 419
individualism, 93, 248
industrial plants, 430
influenza epidemic, 240
initiative, 461
inland water names, 22
Inshapiungri, 60

intermarriage, 325-26, 447; encouraged
by missionaries, 395-96; with the
French, 99

internal sovereignty, 147, 152
intruders, on Indian lands, lack of gov¬
ernment enforcement against, 256
intruders, on Osage lands: continuing
problem on New Reserve, 331-34,
364-65, 367; growing power of, 309-
11; Indians, 366; in Kansas Osage re¬
serve, 300, 301, 304, 307-9, 308; mis¬
fits and opportunists, 365-66; on
Osage land in Missouri, 50-51; Osage
methods of dealing with, 134; Osage
opposition to, 88-89; settlers, 134;
urging for Osage removal, 317
Iowa (Pa Ho tse), 4, 6, 144
Iron Hawk's town, 58
Iron Hawk (White Hair IV), 54, 59, 228
Iroquois, 21, 449, 461
Irving, Washington, 206, 213
Isadawah, 277, 312
Island Man, 216, 217
Isolated Earth People: claim origins on
earth, 7; in the Confederation, 15, 16;
naming ceremonies, 50in56; stories
of, 5-6; traditional name of, 58; un¬
sanitary practices of, 14, 15

J. C. Darling survey, 402
Jackson, Andrew, 135, 154, 239, 314
Jackson, Boyd, 477
James Big Heart, 402, 419
Jasper Exendine, 418
jasperoid, 29

Jefferson, Thomas: attempts to bring
about peace among Indian nations
west of Mississippi, 143-44; Cherokee
removal, 191; on education, 247; fru¬
gality, 152; introduction of large scale
removal policy, 133, 135, 173, 174,

175, 177-79; Lewis and Clark Expedi¬
tion, 110; meeting with Osage dele¬
gation, 140-42, 505117; as a natural
rights scholar, 37, 461; view of the
Indian, 272
Jefferson City, 48
Jennings, Francis: The Invasion of
America, 204

Jesuits, and the Osages, 60, 226-30, 233,
234-37- 344, 353
Jimson Weed, 331, 517038
Jim Town, 331
Joe Boulanger site, 69
Joe Pawnee No Pa she (Not Afraid of
the Pawnee). See Governor Joe (Star
Chief)

Johnstone Park, 79, 418
johoba, 453
Joliet, 46

Josephy, Alvin M., 448-49
jus solis (by under the sun), 411
justice issues, 155

Ka he Kon se ha (Two Creeks Running
Parallel to Each Other), 82
Kansas: in 1862, 252; movement to oust
Osage, 391; Osage lands in, 285-90;
Osage trails in, 74-77, 76; Osage vil¬
lages and camps in, 49-63; protection
of Medicine Lodge murderers, 350;
protest of Drum Creek Treaty, 303-4;

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

558 / Index

refugee Indian problem in, 265-67;
southern boundary of, 331; statehood,
264, 5111124

Kansas City (Kaws mouth), 75, 325
Kansas (Kaw): cession of portion north
of the Kansas River, 186; formation,
11; and Indian-Knoll, 3; refusal to
help Osage, 123; splintering off from
Osages, 11, 48, 465; teaching of dance
to Osages, 465

Kansas-Nebraska Act, 238,246,248-49,
308, 314-491

Kansas Territory: formation of, 248; map
of, 249; population growth 1834-
1880, 266; slavery controversy, 62,

225, 238, 250

Ka she Segra (Tracks Far Away), 55, 64-
65, 68, 128

Kaskaskia, Illinois, 44
Kaskaskias, n, 48, 95, 96, 102
Kaw (Kansas) River, 75
Kay County Gas Company, 423
Keechies, 266
Keeler, George B., 418
Keep, Scott, 432
Kentucky settlers, 183
kerosene, 417
Keweh ha ka Toby, 329
Kichais, 111, 115
Kickapoo, 122, 123, 189
Ki he ka Ah ke ta (Chief Protectors), 18,
4°, 316

Ki he ka Hill, 432

Ki he ka Shin ka (Little Chief), 261, 337
Ki he ka Stet sy (Tall Chief), 337
Ki he ka Wa ti an ka (Saucy Chief),

107, 261

King George's War, 99
Kingman County, Kansas, 62
king’s evil, 241
King Williams’ War, 99
kinship terms, 458
kinship ties, 40, 459
Kiowa-Apache, 277

Kiowas: calendar, 215, 216; and the horse,
28, 95; at Medicine Lodge Council,
277; Osage massacre of, 34, 215-17
Kipling, Rudyard, 203
Klamath: forest reserves, 478; termina¬
tion, 429, 477, 479
knives, 19, 20
Knott, Eliphilet, 247
Koasati, 67
Koch, Albert, 47

Ko ke Se ke ta gra (Approaching Foot
Sounds), 108

Kon sa. See Kansas (Kaw)

Kon sa Ka ha la, 345
Kon za clan, 11, 44-45, 48
Kon za Wa ha pe, 79
Kyle, Mollie, 441

Labadie, George V., 477
Labadie, Sylvester, 5041153
Labette County, Kansas, 74, 221, 285
Labette Creek, 52

La Chapelle, Jean Baptiste Janot/Jeanot
dit, 102

La Flesche, Francis: on Osage character,
205-6; Osage hunting trails, 79-84;
on White Hair, 53

Lafon, Jean (Tracks Far Away I), 55, 64-
65, 68, 128

la Harpe, Bernard de, 97

Lake of the Ozarks, Gladstone Cove, 47

lakes, 430

Lamine River, 74

land, 293-94; as the basis of all wealth,

94; communal ownership of, 87; and
economics, 453-54; frontier, 364; In¬
dian concept of, 87, 256,484, 526^3;
Indian ownership of in 1980,452;
Osages’ unique position as contribu¬
tors of land for the use of other Indi¬
ans, 186-89; passing of, 481-82; per¬
sonal ownership of, 173; sales, 258;
vs. earth, 454

land cession, 165-71; of 1808, 166-68,

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 559

167, 295; of 1818, 160, 168; of 1825,
170, 186, 193; of 1825-1839, 168, 171;
of 1865, 281-89; of all Cherokee
land claims in Oklahoma, 160; of all
Osage lands in Oklahoma, 165; ceded
lands controversy, 287-89; opposition
groups, 303-9; of Osage lands in Mis¬
souri and Arkansas, 186; Osage pur¬
chase of portion of Cherokee Outlet,
161; school lands problem, 324; Set¬
tler’s Protective Association, 288-89;
treaties, 296
land forms, 25

Land Ordinance of 1785, 150
land policies, 89-91, 199-201
land tenure, and corn, 450-51
land titles, seizure of by Euro-Americans,
90, 166, 454

language, of Osages, 32, 284; revealing of
prehistoric homeland, 22
Lap Land, 161
La Salle Expedition, 10
law: Indian, 462; traditional Osage,

262, 392
Law, John, 98
Lawrence, Kansas, 250
lead, 29, 94, 407
Leahy, Thomas J., 442, 470,471
lease auctions, 420

Leavenworth, Lawrence, and Galveston
Railroad Company, 287
Leclerc, Charles Victor Emmanuel, 132
Le Due, Baptiste, 115
Lee, R. W, 260

legal problems, and grass leases, 383-85

leggins, 209, 210

Lessert, Clement, 338

Lewis, Meriwether, 143-145

Lewis and Clark Expedition, no, 139, 143

liberty, 459

life, seven crises of, 21

limestone, 407

Lincoln, Abraham: abandonment of the
Osages, 263; decision to take Indian

Territory, 265; ethnic blindness, 256-
57; program for the West, 258
linguistic studies, 22
Lipan Apache, 28, 34, 109, no, 132
Lisa, Manuel, 105
literature: the Indian and, 455-58;

Osage, 257

Little Arkansas River, 62, 80
Little Bear, 52-53, 261
Little Bear band, 62
Little Beaver, 261, 278, 279, 305
Little Beaver II, 279
Little Big Horn, 35, 184, 280
Little Bone Osages, 41
“little brothers,” 487
Little Caney, 79, 332
Little Chief, 261, 337
Little Earth Maker, 66
Little Hawk Woman crossing, 345
Little Hawk Woman (Gra to Me Shin ka),
82, 331

Little Hawk Woman's Grove (Gra to Me
Shin ka U su), 69, 82
Little House of Mysteries, 15
Little Lame Doctor, 337
Little Mouth Forest, 79, 84
Little Osage District, 352
Little Osage-Marmaton, 221
Little Osage River, 48, 75
Little Osages, 30, 352; close relationship
with the Missouri and Illinois, 44;
Down Under, 41, 48,49; Heart Stays,
10, 40, 48, 352, 498n23; hunting
camps, 62; Kansas splinter, n, 45, 48;
on the Neosho-Grand, 52-53, 133;
Saline County site, 49; saving of Kan¬
sas from a series of Indian raids, 263-
64; site in Bend of the Missouri, 7;
strong relationship to the Orr focus
of the Oneota aspect, 45; terrain pref¬
erences, 10; White Hair, 60, 352
Little Red River, 80
Little River, 77

Little Shrines, 16, 498^5, 4991138

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

560 / Index

Little Town Below (Village of the Pipe),
51 , 55 , 58,59

Littletown (Oswego, Kansas), 55
Little Town Over the River (Little Au¬
gust Ogeese Capitaine) Village, 60
Little Walnut, 74

Little White Hair (Wa Sop pe or Black
Bear), 55, 59, 300-301, 305, 315
living vs. getting, 466-67
location, of Osages: legends, 21-22; rela¬
tive, 25-27
Locke, John, 458
lodges, 347

Logan, et al. v. Andrus, et al., 432
Lo Ha (Buffalo Back) clan, 83
London, Jack, 458
long drive, 369, 370-71
Long-Nosed God cult, 5
Long Summer Humid Continental cli¬
mate, 23

Lookout, Fred, 364, 431
Lorimer, Louis, 126
Lother, Edward, 165
“lots,” 421

Loud Clear Voice, 301
Louisiana: British claim, 145; fur and
hide trading centers, 105-6; heavy
liability to Spain, 131, 449; increase
in non-Indian population, 146; popu¬
lation of, 1771, 120

Louisiana Purchase, 152; cause of drastic
changes in American Indian policy,
172-73, 175, 184; Osage effect on,
35-37

Louisiana Territorial Act, 179
Loups (Wolf-Pawnee), 182
L' Ouverture, Toussaint, 132
Lovely, William, 159
Lovely Purchase, 159, 168, 169

Machiavelli, Niccolo: The Prince, 4
Mack, John, 7

Mad Buffalo (Skiatook), 56, 193
Mad Chief, 329

Magnet Cove, Arkansas, 29
Mali slion ka Tal (Black Dog), 337
Mallet Brothers, 97
Manifest Destiny, 85, 90, 186, 255-58,
274-75
manioc, 450
Mann, Horace, 247
manners, 38

Man of Mystery, 16, 499^6
Manrinhabotso/Mo he Ah Gra (Reaches
the Sky), 58

manufacturing, Osage, 92

Marais des Cygnes, 75, 221

Marcy, Randolph B., 75, 505117

margin of survival, cycle of, 488-89

Marie Me Gra to (Hawk Woman), 279

Marland, E. W, 423

Marland Refining Company, 423

Marmaton River, 48, 49, 74, 75, 207

marmitons, 207

Marquette, Jacques, 46, 95

marriage, reverse, 326

marriage customs, 210, 359-61, 495

Marshall, John, 461

Martin, Francisco, 107-8

Martin, George W, 331

Marx, Karl, 458

Mary Petronilla, Sister, 230

Maskoutin Indians, 96

Mates Springs, 68

Mathes/Matthews, (William P. “Bill”
[Red Corn], 228, 251, 311, 5i6n36
Mathews, John Joseph, 58, 165, 211, 221,

251, 363,484
Mathews, Lillian, 484
mauguary, 450
Maxey, S. B., 260
Mayan culture, 6
Mayan morning prayer, 8-9
McCoy, Isaac, 208
McMurtry, William and James, 192
McNickle, D’arcy, 470
measles epidemic, 240
meat-packing business, 368

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 561

Medford, Oklahoma, 68
medical plants, 450
Medicine Lodge, Kansas, 62-63
Medicine Lodge Council, 276-77
Medicine Lodge massacre, 63, 350-51
Medicine Lodge Treaty, repudiation
of, 280

medium of exchange, 93
Me ka Ki he ka (Star Chief). See Gover¬
nor Joe (Star Chief)

"melting pot," 468
Membre, n

Men of Mystery clan, 116, 499^6
Menominee Tribe, 429
Meramac River, 73
mercantilism, and destruction of the
Osage culture, 93-95
mescal bean, 363-64
"Messiah Craze,” 363
mestizo (Spanish-Indian mixed-
blood), 473
metal cartridges, 127
metis (French-Indian mixed-blood),

402, 473

Me tso Shin ka (Little Grizzly Bear), 53
Mexican-American War, 168, 248
Mexican ceramics, 6
Miamis, 182

Michel/St. Michel/Mikles, 109
Mid-Continent Oil Field, 29, 418, 422
midden ring, 498034
Middle Boggy, 77
Middle Waters, 104

Midland Valley Railroad Company, 404
Miege, Bishop, 235
migration concept, 43-45
Miles, Laban J., 199, 358, 374; on child
marriages, 360; 1890 Commissioner’s
Report, 359; on efforts of passing of
buffalo, 362; on formation of constitu¬
tional government, 391; on intruders,
365; on "living poor,” 442; on Qua-
paws, 366; and scalping, 373
Military Supply Road, 75

Milky Way, 14
Millard, Ret, 405
Miller, William L., 405
"Million Dollar” elm tree, 420, 421
Mill’s Town, 60

mineral estate, 425, 431; changes in laws
affecting, 422; reserved from allot¬
ment, 407; shrinking, 429-30
mineral rights, 341, 385
minerals, 25, 28, 29, 166, 258
minerals council, 407, 408-10, 430-33,
431-32

mineral trust vs. mineral estate, 410.

See also Osage Mineral Trust
Miro, Estevan, 107, 108, 118, 122, 128, 183
missionaries: blame of Indians for failure
to become “civilized," 396; Catholic,
226; encouragement of intermarriage,
395-96; misdirected efforts, 220; Prot¬
estant, 218, 219; role in failure of mis¬
sions, 221-24
Mission Creek, 339
Mission of St. Francis de Hieronymo
(Jerome), 509023

missions: benign peonage, 103; clustered
along the Neosho-Grand River, 222;
failure of, 221-26; location of, 220-21
mission schools, 219-20, 220
Mississippian mounds, 4, 6
Mississippian Oneota, 4
Mississippian Phase, of the Late Wood¬
land culture, 4-9

Mississippians, 4; Arkansas River, 10; cul¬
ture, 24; pottery, 6

Missouri: Osage trails in, 72-74; Osage
villages and camps in, 45-49
Missouri, Kansas, and Texas Railway
Company, 404
Missourias, 4, 48, 219, 245
Missouri Compromise, 250
Missouri Democrat, 277
Missouri Ozarks, 45
Missouri River, 74

Missouri River fur trade, 1775—1776, 105

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

562 / Index

Missouri Valley, 28
Mitchell, Francis [Mikles], 329
Mitchell, Joseph [Mikles], 329
Mitscher, O. A., 361, 373, 393
mixed-bloods, 325-30; and allotment,

386,401; among the full-bloods, 176;
creation of separate Osage culture,

328; cultural blending, 472-74; dis¬
possessed by intruders, 328; distinct
groups of, 326-28, 402; excessive
abuse of in removal, 397; harassment
of, 330; increasing influence in Osage
affairs, 327, 328, 387; intermarriage
with both Osage and Kaw, 326; legal
rights, 397; loss of improved property,
310-11; non-people, 473-74; Osage
tribal composition, 474; and United
States citizenship, 329-30; views
held by the majority culture toward,
395-97

mixed marriages. See intermarriage

Mocane, Oklahoma, 81

moccasins, 209

modern Indian, 482

Mogray,Jean Baptiste (Mongrain), 54,

58, 325

Mogray, Noel (Mongrain), 54, 154, 156
Mo ha Pa se Shu tsy (Red Cliffs), 81
Moh en ka Shin ka (Little Clay), 66
Molt en ku ah ha, 83
Moh he Hun ka (Sacred Knife), 20
Moh he Se e pa bio ka (Round Handled
Knife), 20

Moh he Shu tsy (Red Knife), 20
Moh he Sop pe (Black Knife), 20
Moh ne Pa she (Not Afraid of the
Gopher), 67-68

Moh sa He (A Thicket of Arrow Wood), 83
Moh se Kali he (Blacksmith), 153
Moh shon, 86

Moh shon Ah ke ta/ Moh shon ka shay
(Protectors of the Land), 18, 40, 91, 303
Moh tse Sta Ka ha (Bow Wood Creek), 80

Monks Mound, 6
Monroe, James, 193
Monroney, Mike, 478-79
Mon shou Ka shi, 337
Montesquieu, Charles de, 362, 458;

The Spirit of Laws, 37-38
Montgomery, Jim, 250
Montgomery County, Kansas, 74
Morgan, Lewis Henry, 458
Morrill, Justin Smith, 292
Morrill, Lot Myrick, 292, 316-17
Morrill Acts, 292
Morrison, Oklahoma, 84
Morrison, T. F., 296
Mo she Scab (I am White), 80
Mo shon Ah ke ta Ka ha (Protector of the
Land Creek), 82

Mosier, Joseph (Monjeon), 329, 330

mother, importance of, 396

Mottled Eagle clan, 61, 101, 116, 279

mountain man, 362

"mourning” at sunrise, 208

Mourning Ceremony, 373

Muddy Boggy, 77

Murphy, Thomas, 300

muskets, 99

Muskogee, 122

mystic arrows, 21

naming ceremonies, 501 n56
Nasuer,John Basil (Bazil Nassier), 156
Natchitoches, 74, 77, 106, 109-10, 117-18
nationalism, rise of, 248
Native American Church, 364
natural gas, 417

natural rights, 37-39, 196-97, 248, 458,
460-61

Navajo Marines, 471

Naval Reserve, 471

Ne ah he He sko pa (Deep Ford), 80

Nebraska Territory, 248

Ne ha Ka ha (Falls Creek), 82

Ne ka Log ny (Good Man), 52oni6

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index

Ne ka To (do) he To won (Good Man
Town), 47

Ne ke a Shin ka. See Society of Little
Old Men (Ne ke a Shin ka)

Nelagony, Oklahoma, 80
Nelagony Creek, 79
Nellie Johnstone, 418
Ne Log ny (Good Water), 79
Ne ne Po sta (Shooting Springs), 80, 83
Neosho Agency, 198, 234, 315
Neosho cession, 163
Neosho County, Kansas, 221, 285
Neosho-Grand River: Claremore bands
at, 30; Little Osages on, 52; Osage
trails on, 77, 79; Osage village clus¬
ters on, 49, 57, 63; White Hair vil¬
lages on, 51, 52-53, 56-60
Neosho Grand Valley, 28
Neosho Mission, 219, 220, 221, 223
Ne Pe she (Bad Water), 79
Ne scab Lo scah (Place Between Two
Rivers), 82

Ne shu Moie (Traveling Rain), 52
Ne Shu tsy (Red River), 33, 74, 77,

80, 106

Ne Shu tsy Shin ka (Little Red River), 80
Ne ske le Ka ha (Saltwater Creek), 80
Ne ske le Ka ske pe, 81
Ne ske le Ne (Saltwater River), 80
Ne ske le U su U gra (Salt Lowland
Forest), 80

Neutral Lands idea, failure of, 163
New Deal, 475, 477
Newkirk, Oklahoma, 33
Newman, Tillie Karns, 239
New Reserve, Osages and: agreement
on the final reserve, 339-40; appear¬
ance of whites to capitalize land
and money, 351, 365; attempts to
obtain deed from government, 346;
boundaries, 346; deed held in trust by
government, 346; and development
of beef industry, 386; first successful

/ 563

commercial well discovered in, 418;
food shortages, 346-47, 350; geo¬
graphic location, 386; growing con¬
flicts with Euro-Americans on plains,
347; housing problem, 347; impor¬
tance of access to buffalo, 340; impor¬
tance of holding land in common,

341; long hunts of 1870-1875, 351-
52; loss of 1871-1872 crop, 346; map
of, 162; negotiations for, 335-40; peti¬
tion for a change back to Jesuits, 348;
price controversy, 336, 342-44; re¬
quired payment for government
"rations,” 347, 351; reserve size and
population, 337-38, 340-42; selection
committee, 337; social and economic
conditions, 352-53; strings attached,
345-46; “thrown into the bluffs,” 339
newspapers, 481

New York Indians, and Neosho Agency, 315
Niangua River, 45, 46, 47, 73
Nichols, David, 255
Ninnescah, 75, 77

Nion-Chou Town (Neosho Town), 58
Nix/Nixon, Bill (Red Corn), 228, 251,
5i6n36

“noble savage,” 458
“nobodies” 99

No Heart (Possibly Big Heart), 337
No Man’s Land, 161
No ne O pa (Pipe), 59
"non-people," 473-74
No-pa-wah-la/No p<j Walla (Thunder
Fear), 52, 62, 301, 305, 319, 337
Northeastern Nations: background on
the removal of, 180, 181-82; removal
by exchange, 189
northern Caddo, 6
“northern marches,” 46
Northwest Ordinance of 1785, 305
Northwest Ordinance of 1787, 150
Not Afraid of the Pawnee (Pawnee No Pa
she). See Governor Joe (Star Chief)

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

564 / Index

No tse Wa spe (Heart Stays), 81
novaculite, 29

Nowata County, Oklahoma, 66
nutrition levels, decrease in, 361
Nuttall, Thomas, 10, 11, 193, 244

oath of allegiance, 262
O’Carter, Peter, 329
occupancy, right of, 200
Octanah School, 282
Office of Indian Affairs, 307
Ohio Company, 182
Ohio headwaters, concentration of
French forts along, 100
Ohio Hopewellian, 6
Ohio Valley, 22,44

oil: annuities, 359; discovery of, 417-18;
leases, 385; lease sales, 419-22; produc¬
tion, 422-25; wells, reactivating, 434
Okesa, Oklahoma, 80
O ke sa (Midway), 7, 13, 14, 350
Oklahoma: Democratic when entering
the Union, 405; Panhandle, 161; State¬
hood, 379

Oklahoma Territory, 186; Osage trails in,
77-84; Osage villages and camps in,
63-68

O la ho Walla (Beautiful Voice), 337

old age, attaining, 495

Old Claremore, 337

old Northwest, Indian Wars of, 182-85

Old White Hair, 59

Omaha, 3, 44

Oneida Community, 247

Oneota aspect, 7, 45, 500ni6

Onion Creek, 61

open ranges, 87

open tillage agriculture, 468

O poti (Elk), 14

Opon Tun ka (Big Elk), 13-14, 301
Order of the Dove, 373
origins and early history, Osages: com¬
munities, four basic types of, 42-43;
compact core area, 25; connection

with Hopewell and Mississippian
phases of Woodland culture, 7; core
groups, 30; genesis story, 12-14; gov-
ernment organization, 17-19; merg¬
ing of five subdivisions to make up
people, 4, 5, 14; original homeland
stories, 22; possible invasion from the
northeast, 7; settlement in hill coun¬
try that adjoined a major river, 10;
stories of forming the Confederation,
14-17; stories of origins, 12-22; tech¬
nological developments, 19-21
Orr focus, 7, 45
Ortega, Jose, 103, 470
Osage Agency, 315

Osage Allotment Act of 1906, 165-66
Osage Boarding School Reserve, 403
Osage Capital, 80
Osage-Cherokee Wars, 191-95
Osage Council: negotiation with the
Cherokee National Council over
Outlet lands, 343; oil lease with Fos¬
ters, 419; outlawing of child mar¬
riages, 360; pressure on to allot, 387;
resolution on extension of the min¬
eral period, 426-27; and Vann-Adair
affair, 312

Osage County, Oklahoma, 69, 82, 359,
410; grazing, 389; identical boundary
with Osage reservation, 268; network
center of Osage trails, 85
Osage Empire: boundaries, 27-28; end
of, 297; expansion, 30-35; importance
of communication among villages,
41-42; intrusions on during Civil
War, 264-67; map of, 112; relative lo¬
cation of in the United States, 25-27
Osage-French, 95, 325, 327
Osage Hills, 492
Osage-Irish, 327
Osage Land Company, 407
Osage Little Yellow Flower, 453
The Osage Magazine, 278
Osage Mineral Trust: Agency expenses

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index

paid by Osages, 428-29; extensions,
422, 425-28; operation of, 452; threat
of termination, 428-29
Osage Mission, 75, 234-37; official name
of, 509n23; Osage Indian School, 230,
233, 2 35 _ 36; poorly funded, 164
Osage Mission Area, 75
Osage Mission Register, 60, 163, 235, 279
Osage museum, 485

Osage National Organization (ONO), 432
Osage Neutral Lands, 51, 163, 186
Osage Oil Company, 419
Osage Orange, 92
Osage River, 47, 48, 73, 75, 221
Osage River bands, 30
Osages, and Euro-Americans, 95-102; ad¬
justment to Western civilization, 357-
58; awareness of the need for change,
225-26; barriers to overland travel
and trade, 29-30, 104, 272; blockade
of the Missouri and Arkansas Rivers,
447; blockade on the lower Missouri
and Arkansas Rivers, 35, 37; blockage
of Spanish peace efforts because of
territorial concerns, 114-15; compac¬
tion into increasingly smaller areas,
225, 227, 233-34, 2 37 - 38; conflict of
objectives with Spanish, 109-17; de¬
velopment of advance guidelines for
dealing with Americans, 133; dislike
of the British and Spanish, 101-2,

106; distinction between legal set¬
tler and intruder settler, 133-34; dis¬
unity as a function of Westernization,
304; effect of views held by Euro-
Americans towards the Indian, 253;
first Osage delegation to Washing¬
ton, 140-43; forces working against
acceptance of, 228; foreknowledge
of French, 95; French and Indian War,
99-101; great spread in adjustment to
Western civilization, 400; impact of
the Kansas-Nebraska Act, 250-53;
influence in costs of Spanish Louisi-

/ 565

ana, 131-32; internal quarrels, 244; in¬
truders on Osage land in Missouri,
50-51; at Medicine Lodge Council,
277; move away from traditional life
after 1849, 198; Osage-Spanish War,

117-21; petition for removal of mis¬
sions, 223-24; placement under mar¬
tial law, 63; problem of American
citizenship, 411, 432-33; raids on,
192-93; reactions to end of treaty
making, 298-99; reaction to the news
of Americans taking over Louisiana,
139; relationships with French, 96-99;
response to Spanish aggression, 115-
17; role in Southeast Kansas, 290; as
scouts for Custer, 35, 278-80; Spanish
and Osage character, 102-4; Spanish
desire to exterminate Osages, 113,

119-20; Spanish embargoes and
threats, 105-6, 109, no, 112, 124;
Spanish Paper War against Osage,
121-27; split among Osages about
disposition of Euro-Americans, 125;
stereotype as wild and uncivilized,

157; “tax collectors,” 349; taxing of
trail herds, 370; trade with, 10, 45, 89;
and transition from French to Span¬
ish, 101-2; Vasquez Affair, 107-9; view
of cultural aspects of Western civiliza¬
tion, 87; willingness to accept differ¬
ences in other people, 463. See also
Indian policy; treaties
Osages, and other Indian Nations: asso¬
ciation with Illinois Indians, 10-11;
attacks on emigrant Indians, 134-35;
conquest of the Southern Central
Plains, 447; deterrent to Indian emi¬
gration from the east, 182; fighting
the Comanche and Lipan Apache,

109; granting of permission to hunt
for food, 19; history of problems with
emigrant Indian nations, 173-75; pres¬
sure on Caddos, 115; pressures on the
Comanche and Lipan Apache, 132;

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

566 / Index

Quapaws (Arkansas), 56, 113; refuge
to Indians during Civil War, 264-67;
respect for northeastern people, 123;
three attacks upon by other Indians,
121-23

Osages, contributions: in botany and ag¬
riculture, 449-53; in economics, 453-
55; in formation of the United States,
460-61; in literature, 455-58; place in
United States history, 35-39; in po¬
litical thought, 458-62; service in
World War 1 ,412,470-71; service in
World War II, 471-72
Osage-Spanish War, 117-21
Osage Trace, 50
Osage Tribal Circle, 6
Osage Trust Fund, 358,402-3
Osage Trust Lands, 289,293, 316, 323,
514m

O su ka ha (Those Who Make Clear the
Way), 14

Oswego, Kansas (Heart Stays), 81
Otoe-Missouri, 4, 144
Ottawas, 96, 182
Overlees, Frank, 418
overlordship, establishment of, 90
overreachment, 285
Owl Creek, 52
Owl's Village, 60
ox bow lakes, 23

Ox-Bow Route (Butterfield Route), 248

Oxford, Kansas, 62

Ozarks, 488, 492

Ozark Uplift, 27

Ozrow Falls, 77

Pacific University, 282
Pahushan, Marie, 54, 156
Pa In1 Tepa (Round Hills), 84
Paillio, Paul (Belieu), 160
Pa le Wa kon ta Ke Ka ha (Medicine Man
Creek), 79
Palmer, John H., 418

Panther (Puma) clan, 12-14, l 5 > 17, 4 T
117, 125
papaw, 81
Papin, Joe, 338
Papin, Julia Roy Lessert, 338
Papin, Melicour, 58
Papin's Town, 58
Parker, I. C., 370
Parkman, Francis, 365, 447
parks, 430

Parsons, David, 293, 314
Pa se Shin ka Lo pa (Two Little Hills), 79
Passoni Tanwha/Pasuga/Pasona Town
(Ho tse Tun ka or Big Cedar), 51, 61,
66, 67

Passu Ougri n/Pa short O gre (Those
who Came to the Bend of the
River), 61, 66
paternalism, 392-93, 462
Pawhuska, Oklahoma, 80, 336, 352,

4 ° 3 , 404

Pawhuska parish, 496
Paw hu Stet sy (Long Hair), 278
Pawnee, 28, 30, 34
Pawnee Deer Creek villages, 82
Pawnee No Pa she (Not Afraid of the
Pawnee). See Governor Joe (Star
Chief)

Peace Agreement of 1785, 107

Peace Commission, 280

peacemaker clans, 17, 43, 59, 64

pecans, 452

pelage, 92

pemmican, 211-12

Penn, Antoine, 182

Pensecola, Oklahoma, 221

peonage, 94, 103

People of the Middle Waters, 23

People of the Oaks. See Claremore bands

Peorias, 11, 182

Perez, Manuel, 116, 118, 122, 127, 181,
182, 183

personal cleanliness, 238

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 567

Pe se (acorns of the red oak), 9
petroleum: in demand as a cheap source
of lamp oil, 417; reserves in the
Osage fall, 86, 424-25; seeps, 418
Pe tse Moh kon Ka ha (Fire Medicine
Creek), 79
peyote, 364
Phillips, C. J., 278
Phillips, Frank, 421
Phillips, Isaac, 383
philosophic contributions, 459-60
Phoenix Oil Company, 419
Physical Divisions, 40-41
physical environment, elements of, 25-30
pictographs, 69

Pike, Albert, 53, 54, 68-69, 260, 261,271,
5 0 5n7

pioneer farmers, 286
pipeline, 419
pipestone, 29, 60, 91
Pixley, Benton, 222-23
Plains Indians: syncophantism, 105; wars
upon the Plains after 1865, 272
Plano, 21
plants, 22, 29
plows, 153
pocket gopher, 67

Poland, John Scroggs, 330, 331, 332-34
Pollock, William J., 359, 363-64
polygamy, 360-61

Pomme de Terre River, 11, 45,46, 47
Pomme de Terre River Big Osages, 11
Ponca, 3, 44; Peacemaker clan, 43, 64
Ponca City, Oklahoma, 80, 82
Pond Creek, Oklahoma, 33, 69, 80, 83,
339 . 345

Pontiac: siege of Ft. Pitt, 447; war against
British, 148, 149
Pontotoc County, Oklahoma, 68
Ponziglione, Paul M., 58, 59, 235, 237,
251, 362

Poor Pawnee Creek, 33, 69
Pope, John, 332

popular sovereignty, 248
population, Osages, 242-45; in 1873, 346;
in 2002, 480; age groups in 1878, 178-
Si; changing, 386; at contact, 479-80;
decline in first year on the new reser¬
vation, 346; effect of attrition upon,
244; estimates of, 118-19, 204, 243;
growth of through voluntary realign¬
ment of loyalties, 244-45; loss of due
to epidemics and poor nutrition, 361;
on New Reserve, 337-38
Populist Revolt, 201, 285, 290-91,461
pork, 368

Portable Shrine, 16
portage routes, 325
Portales, Count, 213
Port of New Orleans, 127
post system, 92
potatoes, 212, 450, 452
Potato River, 47

Potawatomis, 182, 229, 366, 401, 429
Potter, Carroll H., 365
pottery: Hopewellian, 6; at the Little
Osage site, 7; Mississippian, 6
Pottowatomie, 96, 123
Power River road, 447
pow wows, 359

Prairie Oil and Gas Company, 419

prairies, 23

prayer eagles, 208

Prehistoric Age, 3-12

preserves, 430

Pretty Bird, 60-61, 64

Price, Henry, 290

Proclamation of 1763, 148-49

pronghorn, 143

property protection, 392

the Prophet, 185

Protectors of the Land (Moh short Ah
ke ta/ Moh short ka shay), 18,40,

9 i. 303

Protestant missionaries, 218, 219
provisions, 302

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

568 /

Pumpkin Creek, 52, 61
purification ceremonies, 238

Quachita, 115
Quaker Agents, 315
Quakers, 309
Quapaw Creek, 366
Quapaws (Arkansas): “big talk” about
Osages, 113, 124; carrying of epidem¬
ics to Osage, 238; and Illinois, 11;
intruders, 366; link with Indian-
Knoll, 3; and Neosho Agency, 315;
and Osage allotment, 56; pupils at
Osage Mission, 240; Reconstruction
Council, 267; related by language and
origin to Osages, 10
quarantine: fence, 385; regulations, 384;

on southern cattle, 370, 371, 381
Que, Lizzie, 441
Queen Anne’s War, 99
Quivera. SeeWichitas

racecourse, at Claremore, 66
racial bias, 253

Radiant Star (Black Bear) clan. See Black
Bear (Radiant Star) clan
Radisson, Pierre Esprit, 95
Railroad Land Grant Act of 1863, 287-
89, 292

“railroad ring,” 300

railroads, 85; bonds, investment of Indian
funds in, 258; and ending of long
drive, 370-71; interests, 248; land
grants, 151; land sales, 286-88; right
of way reserves, 403, 404
Rainy Mountain Creek, 215
range program, 475
Reagan, Ronald, 522n6
rebel groups, 9
recall, 461

Reconstruction Council, 267-68
Red Bird, 5
red cedar, 9
Red Cloud, 447

Index

Red Corn, Catherine, 484
Red Corn (Ha pa Shu tsy), 228,251,
5i6n36

Redeagle, George, 329

Red Eagle (prayer eagle), 208

Red Eagle subclan, 498n2i

Red Hill Top (Red Cliffs), 81, 83

Redman, Martin, 329

red oak, 9

red paint, 32, 34

“red progressive” movement, 482
Red River (Ne Shu tsy), 33, 74, 77,

80, 106

Red Rock Creek, 77, 80
referendum, 461

reformers: movement, 246-48; re¬
creation of the Indian in the Euro-
American image, 254
reign of terror, of 1920s, 439-42
Reiselman, Henry, 228
relative location, 492
religion, Osage, 89, 208-9, 487, 495
removal: Cherokee, 189, 191, 314; decep¬
tion of reform, 481; by exchange,
t89-95; of Northeastern Nations,

180, 181-82; policy introduced by
Jefferson, 133, 135, 173, 174, 175, 177-
79; as U.S. Indian policy, 135, 175-85,
189-95; and War of 1812, 179-82
removal, Osages, 176-77; death of chil¬
dren and mothers in vast numbers,

177; detrimental effects of, 195-97;
excessive abuse of mixed-bloods in,
397; farewell speech, 345; fund, 322;
from Kansas, 165, 314-15, 344 “ 45 ;
mixed-blood objections to, 328-29;
nomad and unused-lands arguments
for, 176-77; prolonged, 317; as result
of land cession treaties, 296; unique
nature of, 186

Removal Act of 1870: approval, 321-22;
and cost of New Reserve, 336, 343;
Gibson and, 317; and Osage hunting
rights, 63; school land grants in, 323-24

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 569

Removal Council, 317-22; conference
with Osage mixed-bloods, 328; con¬
vening of, 318; Osage money used
to pay the expenses of, 323; Osage
questions, 319-20; Osage requested
changes, 320-21
Renard. See Fox
repeating rifle, 126

Report of the Board of Indian Commis¬
sioners, 275-76
Republican Pawnee, 144, 216
Requerimiento, 102
reservation, guaranteed, 256
reservation “jumping," 149
Reservoir Reserve, 403
reservoirs, 429-30
restitution, 459
Retchie, John, 264
reverse marriage, 326
riding equipment, 207
rifle, ioo-ioi
right of occupancy, 200
Rio Grande settlements, 75
Rivar, Josef (Joseph Revard), 109
River of Life, 233
roach, 209
robbery, 208
robes, 210
rocks, 29
Rogers, Will, 456
rolls. See Annuity Rolls
Roman Nose, 278
Romanticism, 455-56, 457
Roosevelt, Theodore, 404
Ross, John, 261, 263
round-handled knife, 19
round houses, 364

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 458; Discourse on
Inequality, 460
Royce, C. C., 150

Sac, 47, 48, 96, 122, 123, 144
Sac-Fox War Trail, 48,72
Sacred Sky, 261

Sac River, 46, 47
St. Ange, 102

St. Clair, Arthur, 54, 121, 183
St. Genevieve, 73
St.Johns Boy’s School, 403
St. Louis, 106

St. Louis Girl’s School, 403-4

St. Mary's Mission, 251

St. Paul Kansas, 60

St. Regis Seminary, 228-29, 5091116

Ste. Genevieve, Missouri, 35, 115

Salem School, 282-83

Saline County Little Osage site, 49

Saline River, 74

salt, 29

Salt Creek, 77

Salt Creek District, 352

Salt Fork, 68, 77, 83

Salt Plains, 68, 77, 80, 81,83

Salt Rock, 68

San Bernardo, 33

Sand Creek massacre, 276

Sand Springs, Oklahoma, 68, 77

sandstone, 29

sanitation, 237-38

Sans Nerf (Without Sinew), 219

Sansquartier (Nicholas Royer dit), 102

Santa Fe Railroad, 383

Santa Fe Trail, 35, 75, 164, 295

San Teodoro, 33

Sanze Ougrin, 61

saturation fire, 101

Saucy Calf, 419

Saucy Chief, 107, 261

Saucy Tsi shu’s Village,79

Saucy Tsi shu (Tsi shu Wa ti an ka), 55

sausages, 211-12

scalping, 101, 373

Schonmakers,John, 230, 235, 236-37,
240, 251,260, 263
Schoolcraft, H. R., 11, 45
school lands: and ceded lands in Kansas,
285-86; in the Diminished Reserve,
question of payment for, 323-24;

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

570 / Index

grants in Removal Act of 1870, 321,
323-24; omission in Canville Treaty,
285; problem of the compensation for,

323-24

science, faith in, 257
science fiction, 457
Scioto Company, 182
scrofula, 241
scurvy, 240

“searching with the mind," 33
secondary Indian claimants, 187
secondary war clans, 116, 117
Second Buffalo Trail. See Black Dog Trail
Second Indian Regiment, 264
Secretary of the Interior, and Osage min¬
erals council, 409

sectionalism, role in Indian policy formu¬
lation, 177

Sedalia-Baxter Springs Cattle Trail
(Shawnee Trail), 50, 77, 369
Sedgwick County, Kansas, 62, 74
self determinism, 481
Sells, Elijah, 281
Semple, Ellen Churchill, 25
Seneca, 267, 315
Seneca-Shawnee, 315
serfdom, 94
Serra, Fr.Junipero, 103
Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944,
471-72

settlers: carrying of epidemics to Osage,
238; from Kentucky, 183; legal settler
vs. intruder, 133-34; in Outlet lands,
369, 370

Settler’s Protective Association, 288-89
seven bends of a river, 21
Seven Treaties, 1808-1839, 152-65
Seven Years War. See French and In¬
dian War

Shawnees, 182, 194-95, 266, 267
Shegiha Sioux, 3
shell mount culture, 3-4
shelterbelts, 475

Sheridan, P. H., 272-73, 278, 279, 280

Sherman, William, 277, 280, 332
Shin ka Wa sa (Dark Edge), 60
Slw ka (messenger), 16, 214
Slwti tse Lu Sop pe, 84
Shop pe Shin ka (Little Beaver), 261, 278,
279, 305

shopping areas, 435

short grass region, 24

Sibley, George, 22, 62, 68, 204, 243, 244

silver, 93, 94

Silver Lake, 338

Silver Lake Agency, 339

Sinclair, Harry, 421

Sinclair Oil Company, 421

Sing ah Moineh, 66

Sioux: Chewere, 3,4, 6, 43-44; Dakota,

6, 7, 21, 144
Sisters of Loretto, 230
Sisters of St. Francis, 403
Skelly, William G., 421
Skelly Oil Company, 421
Sky Division, 17, 316
slavery: abolition of, 246; Kansas contro¬
versy, 230, 248-49, 266; unknown to
prehistoric Indians, 494-95
slave trade, 34, 98
smallpox epidemic, 215, 240-41
Small War Parties, 16-17
Smedts.John Babtiste, 228
Smith, Adam: Wealth of Nations, 455
Smith, Bill, 441
Smith, Edward R, 274
Smith, Reta, 441
Smith, Robert, 140
Smoots Creek, 62
snake root, 453
sneak grazing, 374
Snow Head, 6

Society of Little Old Men (Ne ke a Shin
ka), 38; in 1870, 301; erosion of pow¬
ers, 125, 316,487, 491; influence, 39;
keepers of Osage stories and legends,
12; lessening of power of the Grand
Hun ka Chief, i3i;loss of power dur-

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 571

ing Spanish period, 130, 132; and
Man of Mystery, 16; passing away of,
391; reorganization of gentile sys¬
tem, 17; representation acquired by
achievement and ability, 40; skill of,
264; threat of constitutional govern¬
ment to, 390
soils, 25, 28
soldiers, 18

Son tsa Ogre (Those who Came to the
Upland Forest), 61

Son tse Shin ka (Little Upland Forest), 80
Son tse Ugre (The Upland Forest), 84
Southeastern nations: adept at feeding
the Anglo-American vanity, 105; re¬
moval by exchange, 189
southern buffalo herd, 24, 62
southern Caddo, 6
Southern Kansas Railway, 370
“southern marches,” 46
Southern Superintendency, 315
South Grand River, 47, 74
sovereignty, 172, 461; before and after
1815, 151, 152; defined, 147; fear of
loss of, 174; fiction of, 201, 273; inter¬
nal, until 1815, 151

Spanish: belief in firearms, 127; buffer
status of Louisiana, 109; colonizing
policies, 90, 94, 102-4; desire to exter¬
minate the Osages, 113, 119-20; em¬
bargoes and threats, 105-6, 109, no,

112, 124; establishment of control,

101; fort as a means of controlling the
Osage, 127; fur trading practices, 104-
7; methods to “civilize" Indians, 102-
3; and murder of three Osage chiefs,
128-29; Paper War against Osage, 121-
27; practice of inducement removal
with eastern Indians, 189; problems
fighting the Osages, 118-21; removal
policies, 175; use of Indians as pawns
in the struggle to keep their colonial
empire, 114; willingness to transfer
Louisiana to France, 131-32

Spanish-American War, 393, 471
Spiro, Oklahoma, 5, 24
Spiro Mounds, 5
Spring Creek, 82
spring hunt, prolonged, 318-19
Spring River, 74, 75, 77
stanica, 212

Stanley, Henry M., 277
States' Rights question, 248
stem-cured grass, 374, 375
steppes, 24
Stevens, Hiram, 439
Strahan, Charles, 228
stream courses, 70
Strike Axe, 69, 337, 339, 345
striker, 165

Striking the Earth, 8, 207-8
“stripper” wells, 434
strouding, 210
Stubbs, Mahlon, 339
Sturges Treaty. See Drum Creek Treaty
subdivisions, gentile system, 40
Subhumid Continental climate, 23-24
subject areas, concept of, 89
sunrise, mourning, 208
Superintendent of Public Instruction,
303-4

surface rights, 407
surplus possessions, 362
surveys, problem of payment for, 402-3
survival factors, Osages, 486-96; adjust¬
ments in survival base, 487; cultural
aspects, 492-96; geograpihic aspects,
492; margin of survival, 488-89; na¬
ture of change, 486-88; recognition
of change, 489-92
Swan Creek, 45
Swanton, John, 47, 205
sweet potatoes, 450
Swift, Gustavus F., 368, 369
Sycamore Creek, 363
symbolism, role in Osage life, 129-30, 495
Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of
the Human Family (Morgan), 458

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

572 / Index

Ta Ka ha (Deer Creek), 33
Talbot, Wallace, 50 01121
Tallchief, 261
tall grass region, 24
tallow candles, 94
Tally, 35, 64, 319
“tally sticks,” 383

Tally’s Town (Black Dog's Town), 61
tanning methods, 92
tattoos, 209

Tawakonies, 115, 122, 266
Tawehash, 122
Tayon, Carlos, 109
Tayrian, Cyprian, 329, 337
Teapot Dome investigation, 420
technologies, 19-21, 88, 95
Tecumseh, 179-82, 180, 185, 195, 196
Te ka ah ka pa na, 329
Teller, Henry Moore, 383
Ten Mile Strip cession, 163
tepary beans, 453
tepee communities, 43, 49
termination, threat of, 477-79, 481
Texas fever, 370

textbooks, biased account of the Ameri¬
can Indian, 483
Thayer, Kansas, 52
Third Buffalo Trail, 77
third world people, 274
thirty-seventh parallel, 330-31
Thomas, C., 150
Thompson, Eric, 91
Thoreau, Henry David, 248
Thorny Bush People, 41, 61, 352
Those Who Came to the Bend of the
River (Passu Ougrin /Pa short O gre),
61,66

Those Who Were Last to Come (Tsi ha
she), 10, 11, 16, 52
Three Forks, 64, 75, 77, 79
Timber Creek, Winfield, Kansas, 62, 75
Timmermans, Peter J., 228
Tinker, Augustus, 5i6n38
Tinker, C. L., 109, 472

Tinker, George Edward, 247, 437
Tinker, Roy, 439
Tinker, William H., 329, 337
Tinker Hill, 82

Tixier, Victor: Travels on the Osage Prairies,
54, 59, 60, 61, 207, 244
tobacco: as industrial and medicinal
plant, 450; market, 109; products, 297
Tocqueville, Alexis de: Democracy in
America, 473

Tonkawas, 28, 67, 115, 194-95
Tonti, Henri de, 10
topeka, 212

To shot1 He (Papaw Bark), 81
Town Maker (Claremore II), 11, 30, 43,
53, 64, 125; death of, 66, 218; signing
of Treaty of 1822, 160; Spanish hon¬
ors, 130; speech by, 201-2
Townmaker’s Town, 61
town site commission, 404, 405
town sites, 403

To won Kon ka He (Go to Meet the Vic¬
tors Town), 47
Toynbee, Arnold, 203
Tracks Far Away II, 55-56, 64, 128, 130
Tracks Far Away I (Ko she Se gr) (Jean
Lafon), 55, 68, 128; Grand Hun ka
Chief, 64-66

Tracks Far Away village, 64
trade: balance of, 94; Euro-American
trade with tribes to the West, 92;
Osage barriers to overland trade, 104;
Spanish embargoes, 105-6, no, 112;
trading posts, 89. See also fur trade;
slave trade

trade, Osages: dependence on, 487; with
Euro-Americans, 10, 45, 89; favorable
treatment to the Illinois district, 116;
food, 92; in hunt products, effects of,
94; opposition to trade on their west¬
ern and southwestern territory, 110;
Osage monopoly in Illinois district,

116; with other Indian nations, 91-92
trading cards, 435

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 573

trail herd taxes, 370
trails, Osage, 69-84; alternate, 71; east-
west vs. north-south, 73; entry points
into Kansas from Missouri, 75; inter¬
connecting system, 71; in Kansas, 74-
77; left bank preferences, 70-71; map
of, 36; in Missouri, 72-74; in Okla¬
homa, 77-84; pattern of, 69-71. See
also hunting trails
transcontinental railroad, 248, 230
Transition period, from Spanish to
French, 131-35
Traveling Rain, 160
Traver, Santiago, 115
treaties, 147-65; abolition of, 292,299,
307; acquisition of land areas as mo¬
tive for, 294; block houses and cabins
for influential chiefs, 153; character¬
istics, 294-97; Council Grove Treaty,
164-65; defined, 147; ending of pro¬
cess of Indian treaty-making, 292,
297-99; making the desires of the
United States appear to be a desire
for the benefit of the Indian, 152;
Proclamation of 1763, 148-49;
slanted to corporate interests, 201;
treaty annuities, 258; Treaty of 1808,
85, 144, 145, 152-56, 158, 184, 191,
294, 5061116; Treaty of 1815, 146, 156-
57,295; Treaty of 1818, 85, 157-60;
Treaty of 1822, 160; Treaty of 1823,
295; Treaty of 1825, 51, 52, 58, 160-
64, 225, 226, 229, 295; Treaty of 1837,
217; Treaty of 1839, 165, 229, 295,

317, 342; Treaty of 1861,261-63;
Treaty of 1865, 295, 301, 310, 316-17,
321,336, 341 - 343 ; Treaty of 1868
(See Drum Creek Treaty); Treaty of
1865 (Canville Treaty), 52, 236, 281-
85,287; Treaty of Fort Greenville,

184; Treaty of Fort Pitt, 172; Treaty
of Ghent, 146; Treaty of Greenville,
180; Treaty of Medicine Lodge, 277;
Treaty of Paris, 101, 145

Tree Sitters, 40, 48
tribal bond, 41, 459-60
tribal education fund. See Civilization
Fund

tribal museums, 484
Trudeau, Zenon, 123, 125-26, 128, 181
Trumbly, Julian, 405
73 d non sa Che ha pe, 82
Tse He Tun ka (Bed of Big Lake), 84
Tse le Ke he (Big Lake), 84
Tsi ha she (Those Who Were Last to
Come), 10, 11, 16, 52
Tsi She pe ago (Buffalo Range), 81
Tsi shu (Sky People), 6, 9, 15; in the Con¬
federation, 15, 16; Grand Chief, 17,

18, 42, 125, 130; knives, 20; peaceful
solutions in preference to warfare, 21;
Peacemaker clan, 59
Tsi shu Wa ti an ka (Saucy Tsi shu), 55
Tsi To ka (Whetstone), 101
Tsi To pa (Four Lodges), 34, 52, 215, 301,
305, 3i9, 337
tuberculosis, 241
Tulsa, Oklahoma, 68
Tumwater, Washington, 325
Turkey Creek, 84
Turner, Frederic Jackson, 173,286,

308, 447

Turner thesis, 447
Twain, Mark, 309

Twelve o’clock (Chetopah/ Tse To pa
[Four Lodges]), 34, 52, 215, 301, 305,
30, 337

Two Little Hills Trail, 79-81, 82, 83, 84
Tyler, John, 226
typhoid fever, 240
Tzewha-changi, 60

Udall, Stewart, 462
"Ugly American,” 494
Ugulayacabe, 128
unallotted Osages, 431, 432
unanimity of action, 490
uncles, 66

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

574 / Index

Union Army: service rendered to by
Osages, 259-60, 308; veterans, 308
Union College, 247
Union Mission, 66, 164, 219, 220
Union Mission Journal, 51
United Foreign Missionary Society, 219
United States Congress: House of Repre¬
sentatives, opposition to Drum Creek
Treaty, 305-7; Senate Committee
on Indian Affairs, 370; Senate treaty
ratification debates in closed ses¬
sion, 305

United States Constitution, 297
unity and harmony, 485
unity of sky and earth, 8
universal literacy, 248
Unrau, 344
U pa le, 83

Upland Forest Big Hills, 61
Upland Forest People, 41, 352
Upland Forest Trail, 79, 84
uplifted plateaus, 27
Upper Mississippian phase, 7
Up River People, 44
urban Indian, 482

U su E ha Shin ka (Little Mouth For¬
est), 79
Utes, 216

Utopia theme, 457

vaccination, 241

Valliere, Joseph, 122

Van Assche,Judocus, 228

Van Meter State Park, 48

Vann, Clement N., 311, 351

Vann-Adair claim, 311-13, 348

Van Quickenborne, Charles, 228

Vasbinder, Keno, 383

Vasquez, Benito, 105, 107

Vasquez Affair, 107-9

Verdigris, 30, 49; Osage villages on, 57,

61, 63

Verdigris Valley, 28,236

Verhaegen, Peter John, 228
Vernon County, Missouri, 48, 75
Verreydt, Felix Livinus, 228
Vial, Pedro, no

Village of the Pipe, 51, 55, 58, 59
villages and camps, 39-42, 403; in Kan¬
sas, 49-63; in Missouri, 45-49
Vincennes, 96
Vincentia, Sister, 230
Virginia Warriors Path, 72
vocabulary, borrowing among Osages
and Euro-Americans, 456
vote-buying, 288

Wa co Ki he ka (Woman Chief), 56,
5171126

Wa co Log ny (Good Woman), 52oni6
Wacos, 266
Wa ha Ka U le, 79
Wa ho pe songs, 14

Wa Kan ta (The Sovereign Being of the
Universe), 363
Wakarusa River, 75, 246
Wakarusa War, 238, 246, 250
Wa kon ta, 13, 14

Wa kon ta Ke (The Mysterious Being of
the Universe), 29
Walker, Francis A., 274-75, 34 1
walking, Osage trait of, 206, 254
wall dams, 475
Walnut River, 74, 75
walnuts, 452

Walters, Ellsworth E., 420
Wa na she (Director of the Attack), 18
Wa na she Shin ka (Little Soldier), 18
Wa pa he (Pointed Sharp Weapons), 20
war clans, 117

warfare, Osages: complete disregard for
their lives in combat, 121; experience
in aggressive warfare, 28; fighting
force, 119; on the plains, 215-17,

257; protection of domain against
uninvited intruders, 18-19, 88-89, 04

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Index / 575

War in Kansas, 198, 236, 238, 314, 489
War of 1812, 114, 145-46, 178, 179-82,
295, 325

War Party in Great Numbers (Grand
War Party), 15, 17, 130
Wa se Tun Ho e (Osage name for the Ver¬
digris River), 82

IVa ska she (Water People), 6, 15; arrow
story, 21; knives, 20; mother group,

21; as original Osage, 14; peaceful so¬
lutions in preference to warfare, 21
IVa she Pe she (Bad Temper), 60
Wa shin Log ny (Pretty Bird), 60-61
Washita River, 69, 79, 216
Wa Sop pe (Black Bear), 59
Wa Sop pe U tsy (Where Black Bears are
Plentiful), 84
water, bodies of, 25
water rights, 452

Wa ti An ka (Dry Plume/Dry Feather),
261, 301, 321, 337
Watie, Stand, 260, 264
Wa tse Ki he ka (Star Chief). See Gover¬
nor Joe (Star Chief)

Wa tso Ta Cee (Yellow Animal), 14
Wayne, Anthony, 133, 184
wealth, curse of, 442-44
Weas, 11

Webb, Walter Prescott, 445-46,454, 458
Webber Falls, 77

Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842, 306
Well, John, 192
West, as direction of death, 70
Western civilization: concept of decision
by leaders, 196; and Indians, 462-74;
Osage cultural contrasts with, 87-
89; rationalized the usurpation of
Indian sovereignty, 147; superiority
of Osage government over, 148; war¬
fare, 257

Westport Landing, 325
West Shawnee Trail, 369
whale oil, 417

“wheel plan,” 406
Whiskey Rebellion, 127
white, symbolism of, 9
White Eagle, Oklahoma, 80
White Eagle (prayer eagle), 208
White Hair, 160, 261
White Hair bands, 42, 48, 50; chiefs, 53-
55; and removal council, 319; villages
of in Oklahoma, 63
White Hair Big Hills, 61
White Hair II, 50, 54, 56-57
White Hair III, 51, 54, 55
White Hair I (Iron Hawk), 53-54,

64, 125, 130; death, 50; at the defeat
of St. Clair, 183; peace council in
St. Louis, 144

White Hair IV (Iron Hawk), 59

White Hair Little Osages, 60, 352

White Hair’s Town, 49, 58, 59, 161, 521m

White Hair V, 59

White Hair villages, 56-60

Whitehorn, Charles, 440

“white man's burden,” 203

White Plume, 59, 123

White River, 11, 45, 73

White Swan ford, 333, 334

Whitman, Walt, 248

Wichitas (Quivera), 28, 122; Osage per¬
mission to hunt and reside in Wichita,
Kansas, 10, 19, 62, 266; Reconstruc¬
tion Council, 267; settlement for kill¬
ing of chief, 350; villages, 74
wickiup, 347
Wild Cat, 329

Wilder, Laura Ingalls: Little House on the
Prairie, 309, 389
wild food plants, 233
Wilkinson, James, 68, 144
William and Mary College, 247
Williams, Bill, 221-22, 251
willow, 19
Wilson, John, 363
Wilson County, Kansas, 52, 53, 74

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

576 / Index

Winds clan, 60
Winfield, Kansas, 62, 317
Winnebago, 4
Wochaka Ougrin, 60
Wolf, 52, 321
Wolf’s Village, 61

Woodland Indians: agriculture and gath¬
ering, 176; designs of compared with
Osage designs, 7-9; flood plains as
preferred terrain, 10
Woodland period, 4
woodsys, 286, 308, 365

Woodward, Oklahoma, 83
Woodward County, Oklahoma, 68
World War II, 101
Wyandot (Huron), 267

yams, 450
Yellow Horse, 261
Younger Brother, 19
Yscanis, 115, 122

Zenobius Membre, 10
zinc, 29, 94, 407

You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Louis F. Burns A History Of The Osage People ( 2004)"

See other formats